Designing a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive evaluation and prioritisation of environmental projects

David Pannell, A.M. Roberts, G. Park, J.K. Alexander

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context A framework was developed to help investors improve the delivery of environmental benefits from environmental programs. The framework, Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER), assists environmental managers to design projects, select delivery mechanisms and rank competing projects on the basis of benefits and costs. Aims To identify design requirements for an environmental investment framework on the basis of consideration of lessons from practical experience, and established theory from decision analysis and economics. Methods The design and delivery of the framework are based on extensive experience from working with environmental managers and policy makers. In addition, the developers have paid close attention to the need for processes that are theoretically rigorous, resulting in a tool that allows valid comparison of projects for different asset types, of different scales and durations. Key results From the practical experience outlined, several important lessons and implications are identified, including the need for simplicity, training and support of users, trusting relationships with users, transparency, flexibility, compatibility with the needs and contexts of users, and supportive institutional arrangements. Use of a theoretically correct metric to rank projects can deliver dramatically improved environmental values relative to a commonly used weighted additive metric. Conclusions Practical and theoretical considerations have strong implications for the design of a practical, effective and accurate tool to support decision making about environmental project priorities. © 2013 CSIRO.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)126-133
JournalWildlife Research
Volume40
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

prioritization
managers
environmental programs
environmental values
decision analysis
ecological value
assets
transparency
ecosystem services
decision making
economics
duration
evaluation
project
resource
cost
need
methodology

Cite this

@article{0d70b0f433104878a5d2ba476da9fc74,
title = "Designing a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive evaluation and prioritisation of environmental projects",
abstract = "Context A framework was developed to help investors improve the delivery of environmental benefits from environmental programs. The framework, Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER), assists environmental managers to design projects, select delivery mechanisms and rank competing projects on the basis of benefits and costs. Aims To identify design requirements for an environmental investment framework on the basis of consideration of lessons from practical experience, and established theory from decision analysis and economics. Methods The design and delivery of the framework are based on extensive experience from working with environmental managers and policy makers. In addition, the developers have paid close attention to the need for processes that are theoretically rigorous, resulting in a tool that allows valid comparison of projects for different asset types, of different scales and durations. Key results From the practical experience outlined, several important lessons and implications are identified, including the need for simplicity, training and support of users, trusting relationships with users, transparency, flexibility, compatibility with the needs and contexts of users, and supportive institutional arrangements. Use of a theoretically correct metric to rank projects can deliver dramatically improved environmental values relative to a commonly used weighted additive metric. Conclusions Practical and theoretical considerations have strong implications for the design of a practical, effective and accurate tool to support decision making about environmental project priorities. {\circledC} 2013 CSIRO.",
author = "David Pannell and A.M. Roberts and G. Park and J.K. Alexander",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1071/WR12072",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "126--133",
journal = "Wildlife Research",
issn = "1035-3712",
publisher = "CSIRO Publishing",
number = "2",

}

Designing a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive evaluation and prioritisation of environmental projects. / Pannell, David; Roberts, A.M.; Park, G.; Alexander, J.K.

In: Wildlife Research, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2013, p. 126-133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Designing a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive evaluation and prioritisation of environmental projects

AU - Pannell, David

AU - Roberts, A.M.

AU - Park, G.

AU - Alexander, J.K.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Context A framework was developed to help investors improve the delivery of environmental benefits from environmental programs. The framework, Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER), assists environmental managers to design projects, select delivery mechanisms and rank competing projects on the basis of benefits and costs. Aims To identify design requirements for an environmental investment framework on the basis of consideration of lessons from practical experience, and established theory from decision analysis and economics. Methods The design and delivery of the framework are based on extensive experience from working with environmental managers and policy makers. In addition, the developers have paid close attention to the need for processes that are theoretically rigorous, resulting in a tool that allows valid comparison of projects for different asset types, of different scales and durations. Key results From the practical experience outlined, several important lessons and implications are identified, including the need for simplicity, training and support of users, trusting relationships with users, transparency, flexibility, compatibility with the needs and contexts of users, and supportive institutional arrangements. Use of a theoretically correct metric to rank projects can deliver dramatically improved environmental values relative to a commonly used weighted additive metric. Conclusions Practical and theoretical considerations have strong implications for the design of a practical, effective and accurate tool to support decision making about environmental project priorities. © 2013 CSIRO.

AB - Context A framework was developed to help investors improve the delivery of environmental benefits from environmental programs. The framework, Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER), assists environmental managers to design projects, select delivery mechanisms and rank competing projects on the basis of benefits and costs. Aims To identify design requirements for an environmental investment framework on the basis of consideration of lessons from practical experience, and established theory from decision analysis and economics. Methods The design and delivery of the framework are based on extensive experience from working with environmental managers and policy makers. In addition, the developers have paid close attention to the need for processes that are theoretically rigorous, resulting in a tool that allows valid comparison of projects for different asset types, of different scales and durations. Key results From the practical experience outlined, several important lessons and implications are identified, including the need for simplicity, training and support of users, trusting relationships with users, transparency, flexibility, compatibility with the needs and contexts of users, and supportive institutional arrangements. Use of a theoretically correct metric to rank projects can deliver dramatically improved environmental values relative to a commonly used weighted additive metric. Conclusions Practical and theoretical considerations have strong implications for the design of a practical, effective and accurate tool to support decision making about environmental project priorities. © 2013 CSIRO.

U2 - 10.1071/WR12072

DO - 10.1071/WR12072

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 126

EP - 133

JO - Wildlife Research

JF - Wildlife Research

SN - 1035-3712

IS - 2

ER -