Group Multicriteria Decision Support for the Aquaculture Siting Problem

1. Group Multicriteria Decision Support for the Aquaculture Siting Problem Yanlai Zhao, Michael Sutherland, Ibrahim Ozer, Dan Lane and Wojtek Michalowski School of Management, University of Ottawa GDN Montreal 2007

2. Problem DefinitionHow best to locate aquaculture farms in the coastal zone? • Coastal zone management problems involve many, varied, and conflicting criteria related to the access and use of marine space • Coastal governance systems involve many, often conflicting participants including governments, communities, NGOs, fishermen, fish farms, recreational users GDN Montreal 2007

3. The Aquaculture Siting Problem Process in the Bay of Fundy BEGIN DAFA ACCEPTS APPLICATION LAND OWNERS AND PUBLIC NOTIFIED DAFA ADVISES ASSOCIATIONS INTER-AGENCY REVIEW YES SHOW STOPPER? END NO APPLICATION REVIEWED BY ASEC ASSOCIATIONS’ COMMENTS (INFLUENCE) PUBLIC COMMENTS FINAL RECOMMENDATION Stage 1 Stage 3 Stage 2 GDN Montreal 2007

4. The stages of the problem ASEC: Aquaculture Site Evaluation Committee GDN Montreal 2007

5. StagedDecisionModel • Describe resources and activities using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) • Initial test for site efficiency using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) • Review modifications to the site by creating efficient alternatives • Rank alternatives using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and group decision methods GDN Montreal 2007

6. An Aquaculture Case Study GDN Montreal 2007

7. Marine Site GIS Identification Components • Resources (R) - the spatial distributions of natural resources for selected species • Habitat (H) - the spatial distributions of important natural habitats • Effluents (E) - spatial distributions of chemicals attributed to human activities or natural sources • Activities (A) - the spatial distribution of human commercial and recreational activities GDN Montreal 2007

8. Lobster Herring: Day/Night Habitat Scallops Rockweed Effluents Urchins Salt Marshes Chemical A Benthic Structures Current Flow Chemical B Chemical C GIS Identification Components: Example Activities Resources Herring Weirs Scallop urchin drags Lobster traps Fish Farm Sites Recreation GDN Montreal 2007

9. Selected site specific valuation component • Assigns value to the spatial-temporal ecosystem inventories • Valuation of a selected marine site takes into account overlapping layers of R, H, E and A and their evaluated cumulative interactions based on “best available” scientific estimates • “Overlap rules” are determined for more complex valuation cases GDN Montreal 2007

10. Directional yield valuation rules for overlapping layers in pairs GDN Montreal 2007

11. GDN Montreal 2007

12. Experimental Design Ranking of 4 sites under differing conditions • A1 + FF: Area1 with activities such as fishing or fish farm sites • A1 – FF: Area1 without activities such as fishing or fish farm sites • A2 + FF: Area2 with activities such as fishing or fish farm sites • A2 – FF: Area2 without activities such as fishing or fish farm sites GDN Montreal 2007

13. Four Marine Site Alternative Use Strategies GDN Montreal 2007

14. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) A B Out In GDN Montreal 2007

15. Apply DEA to the Experiment For A1+FF Output: (1) A: 715.09w1F + 694.89w1N + 142.70w1N + 678.69w2N 715.09 (2) 30%E: 0.0777w1F + 0.0261w1N + 0.0777w1N + 0.0261w2N 0.0777 Input: (3) R: 463.11w1F + 604.11w1N + 469.52w1N + 604.25w2N ≤ 463.11E1 (4) H: 8.41w1F + 4.37w1N + 8.42w1N + 4.38w2N ≤ 8.41E1 (5) 70%E: 0.0777w1F + 0.0261w1N + 0.0777w1N + 0.0261w2N ≤ 0.0777E1 And (6) w1F + w1N + w1N + w2N = 1 (7) w1F , w1N , w1N , w2N , E1 ≥ 0 GDN Montreal 2007

16. Efficient Region Defined by DEA Source: Jianqiang 2004 GDN Montreal 2007

17. DEA Efficiency Result GDN Montreal 2007

18. 5 Participant Groups • Local Communities • Federal Scientists • Industrial Organizations • Non-governmental Organizations • Provincial Governments GDN Montreal 2007

19. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) • Construction of the hierarchy model • Pairwise comparison • Synthesis of the priorities and ranking of the alternatives • Expert Choice 11 Group Decisions (EC11) AHP computer implementation software GDN Montreal 2007

20. Apply AHP to the Experiment Hierarchical Structure Participant dependent/Site independent Level 1 Goal Ecosystem Goal Level 2 Criteria Resources Habitat Effluents Activities Level 3 Alternatives A1+FF A2+FF A1-FF A2-FF GDN Montreal 2007

21. GDN Montreal 2007

22. Attributed AHP weights to Criteria by Different Participants GDN Montreal 2007

23. Attributed weights of the 5 participants on the 4 components: R, H, E and A (Resources, Habitat, Effluents and Activities) GDN Montreal 2007

24. AHP Result of Federal Scientists GDN Montreal 2007

25. Evaluation summary of 5 participants in comparing 4 marine sites GDN Montreal 2007

26. Ranked Results of Selected Areas by Different Participants GDN Montreal 2007

27. Attributed weights of the 5 participants (E, F, L, M, P) on the 4 components: Resources, Habitat, Effluents and Activities GDN Montreal 2007

28. Conclusions • The results of the group decision support system indicate that the procedures are linked and provide timely information to decision makers on the appropriateness of the method used. • The opportunity to generate alternative efficient options renders the support system flexible, feasible and thereby, more attractive to the overall group decision making problem for the aquaculture lease appraisal and assignment system. GDN Montreal 2007