Transcript We have the tools – how to attract the people?

We have the tools
How to attract the people?
Creating a culture of Web-based participation
in environmental decision making
Raimo P. Hämäläinen
Jyri Mustajoki
Mika Marttunen
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
1
Web-tools
New possibilities to support participatory
decision making
• Decision analytical tools
• Tools for participation
Experiences of web support in
environmental management
• Multiple objectives
• Multiple stakeholders
• Often in georaphically different locations
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
2
Development of lake regulation policies
Lake Päijänne
• 1995–1999
Lake Kallavesi
• 1999–2001
Pirkanmaa lakes
• 1999–2003
In collaboration with
Finnish Environment
Institute
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
3
The tools used
www.Decisionarium.hut.fi
Opinions-Online (www.opinion.hut.fi)
Platform for global participation, voting, surveys,
and group decisions
Web-HIPRE (www.hipre.hut.fi)
Value tree based decision analysis and support
Joint Gains (www.jointgains.hut.fi) used only in a
student role playing test
Multi-party negotiation support with the method of
improving directions
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
4
Opinions-Online v.2.0
Online generation of web-survey forms
Multiple / single choice questions
Open ended
Different ways of setting priorities
• Ranking,
• Approval voting,
• Multiattribute rating
On-line analysis of the results
• Possibility to view and link to the results according to
any field on the questionnaire
• Allows to see differences between stakeholder groups
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
5
Opinions-Online - Creating a new session
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
6
Opinions-Online - Analysis of results
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
7
Web-HIPRE
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
8
Who can use Web-HIPRE to create and evaluate
preference models?
• Requires methodological support
Not easily applicable with general public
• Ok in steering groups with assistance
Independent analysis of steering group
members' models with Web-HIPRE?
• Possibly Ok – still risk of misunderstandings
Web-based learning material can help
understand the methods and software
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
9
Framework for the use of Web
Assisted
use
Preference
elicitation
Analysis
of results
WebHIPRE
Web
Independent
use
Preference
elicitation
Results
to Web
Analysis
of results
Analysis of
the feedback
Information
Web
Site
Results
to Web
OpinionsOnline
Feedback
Information
Public
Analysis of
the feedback
Decision on recommendations
Steering Group
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
10
Stages in a traditional participatory
environmental policy process
1. Initial screening of stakeholder concerns
2. Evaluation and modeling of the problem
3. Informing the public, e.g. about decision
recommendations
4. Collecting and analysing feedback from
the public
5. Decision on policy recommendations
6. Public evaluates the decision
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
11
1. Initial screening of stakeholder concerns
Web does not yet provide natural ways to
inform about possibilities to participate
 Traditional ways of informing the public
still needed
• Newspapers, radio, TV, …
• Mail questionnaires
• Expensive to send and analyze
Once public has been informed, Web can
be used for e-participation
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
12
2. Evaluation and modeling of the problem
Decision analysis provides a transparent
way to model preferences
• Stakeholder weights and rankings can be
published on the Web
Decision analysis interviews
• Analyst assures the proper use of the
methods
Decision conferences/workshops
• Individual preference models as a basis of
discussion and group models
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
13
Lake Päijänne
Steering group, 20 people
• Decision analysis interviews with HIPRE and
Web-HIPRE
• Typical models publicly available on the Web
Initial screening by mail questionnaires
10 public meetings, including interactive DA
Closing seminar
• 51 participants
• Results of the value tree analyses
• Opinions-Online feedback
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
14
Lake Päijänne Web site
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
15
3. Web Site for Informing the Public
Impacts of policy alternatives
• Pictures, text, graphs, diagrams
Description of Web-HIPRE models of the
steering group members
• Clear separation of facts and values
• Aim to explain the values and objectives of
different stakeholder groups
• Can be analyzed by stakeholders in local
meetings
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
16
Pirkanmaa lakes Web site
Information about the recommendations on
the Web
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
17
4. Collecting and analysing public feedback
Direct links to opinions-online surveys and results
• opinions from different geographical areas and
stakeholder groups
• people learn each others’ perspectives – feeling that
they have a voice
Everyone does not have access to Internet
• Alternative ways to participate, e.g. by mail, should be
provided
• Web tools can still be used by entering the opinions
from the mail questionnaires into the web
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
18
Pirkanmaa lakes
Opinions-Online was the primary way to
collect public feedback about the regulation
recommendations
• Web questionnaire and material broadly
advertised on:
• e-Mail lists, Web pages
• Local newspapers
• Local radio and TV
• Possibility to alternatively reply by regular mail
• 333 replied on the Web and 6 by mail
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
19
Visits to the Web questionnaire
Open from
February 19
to March 7
Weekend
Weekend
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
20
Pirkanmaa lakes Web site
Results available
for the public
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
21
Is Web participation too easy?
• How to assure that stakeholders examine the
different options thoroughly?
• E.g. in the Pirkanmaa Web questionnaire very
few people visited the information material
provided on the recommendations
 Learning of the regulation and understanding
of the other stakeholders' views may not happen
Public anchored onto just expressing a voice
or a vote but were not ready for active
participation?
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
22
Discussion
The Web-based framework meets several
objectives of public participation
•
•
•
•
Openness
Fairness
Clarification of facts and values
Opportunity for every person to present an
opinion - not only stakeholder representatives
• Provides a possibility for an active role for the
public
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
23
Culture grows from positive experiences
Collaboration of DA researchers and policy planners
Small steps
Simple Web-based tools first
•
•
•
•
Web pages for information
Surveys
Steering group use of DA tools
Interactive evaluation of decision models by stakeholdes
Can the public use DA tools independently?
This will take years
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
24
How to attract the people?
It is not enough to have tools – technology push
does not work !
New innovations take 30 years to be accepted
eTools for participation are available but they are
not enough:
Participation process has to be designed with a
systems intelligent perspective
-Communication so that trust will not be lost
-Collaboration and learning as a working mode
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
25
References
M. Marttunen and R.P. Hämäläinen (1995): Decision analysis interviews in
environmental impact assessment, European Journal of Operational
Research, 87(3), 1995, 551-563.
M. Marttunen, E.A. Järvinen, J. Saukkonen and R.P. Hämäläinen (1999):
Regulation of Lake Päijänne - a learning process preceding decision-making,
Finnish Journal of Water Economy, 6, 29-37. (in Finnish)
J. Mustajoki and R.P.Hämäläinen (2000): Web-HIPRE: Global decision
support by value tree and AHP analysis, INFOR, 38(3), 208-220.
R.P. Hämäläinen, E. Kettunen, M. Marttunen and H. Ehtamo (2001):
Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water
Resources Management, Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(4), 331-353.
R.P. Hämäläinen (2003): Decisionarium - Aiding Decisions, Negotiating and
Collecting Opinions on the Web, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis,
12(2-3), 101-110
J. Mustajoki, R.P. Hämäläinen and M. Marttunen (2004): Participatory
multicriteria decision support with Web-HIPRE: A case of lake regulation
policy, Environmental Modelling & Software, 19(6), 537-547.
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
26
Web sites
Findings of 20 years of research in environmental
decision analysis and participation:
www.environment.sal.hut.fi/
Lake Päijänne project: www.paijanne.hut.fi
Lake Kallavesi project: www.kallavesi.hut.fi
Pirkanmaa lakes project: www.pirkanmaa.hut.fi
Decisionarium: www.decisionarium.hut.fi
Finnish Environment Institute: www.vyh.fi
Water Resources in Finland:
www.vyh.fi/eng/environ/state/waterre/waterre.htm
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
27