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
Jyri Mustajoki
Raimo P. Hämäläinen
Mika Marttunen
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
World Wide Web
New possibilities to support participatory
decision making
• Decision analytical tools
• Tools for participation
Experiences from environmental
management
• Multiple objectives
• Multiple stakeholders
• Often geographically in different locations
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
We have the tools
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)
Multi-party negotiation support with the method of
improving directions
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Collaboration
Finnish Environment
Institute
• Water Resources Unit
Regional Environmental
Centres
• Southeast Finland, North
Savo, Pirkanmaa
Academy of Finland
• RESTORE, SUNARE and
PRIMEREG projects
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Stages in participatory environmental
policy processes
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
Web-software
We have Web-based software for each task
of the process
To what extent can these tools be used?
• Everyone does not yet have a Web access
What are the requirements for the use?
Experiences of the Web support in lake
regulation management
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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
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
• The results of the value tree analyses
• Opinions-Online feedback
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Lake Päijänne Web site
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Lake Kallavesi
Steering group, 20 people
• 6 meetings
Mail questionnaire to public about the
regulation recommendations
• Sample of 387 persons (response rate 39 %)
• Results posted on the Web by Opinions-Online
7 public meetings (84 participants)
Opinions-Online was a public alternative to
mail questionnaire
• 28 responses
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Lake Kallavesi Web site
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Pirkanmaa lakes
Steering group, 40 people
• 6 workshops/meetings
Initial screening by mail questionnaire
• Sample of 3216 persons (response rate 36 %)
8 workshops/seminars/meetings related to
specific issues
Testing of Image Theory
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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 mail
• 333 replied on the Web and 6 by mail
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Pirkanmaa lakes Web site
Information about the recommendations on
the Web
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Visits to the Web questionnaire
Open from
February 19
to March 7
Weekend
Weekend
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Pirkanmaa lakes Web site
Results available
for the public
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Analysis of
the feedback
Information
Web
Site
Results
to Web
OpinionsOnline
Feedback
Information
Public
Analysis of
the feedback
Decision on recommendations
Steering Group
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 collecting opinions
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
2. Evaluation and modeling of the problem
Decision analysis provides a transparent
way to model preferences
Applicable with relatively small number of
stakeholders
 Steering group of representatives
Different techniques
• Decision analysis interviews
• Decision conferences/workshops
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Use of Web-HIPRE
Decision analysis interviews
• Analyst assures the proper use of the methods
• Stakeholder weights and rankings can be
published on the Web
Decision conferences/workshops
• Individual preference models under collective
supervision
• Group models
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Web-HIPRE
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
3. Informing the public
Web site for information delivery
Analysis of Web-HIPRE models of steering
group members
• Aim to understand objectives of different types
of stakeholder groups
• Collectively in local meetings
• Published on the Web site
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Use of Web-HIPRE
Independent use of Web-HIPRE to create
and evaluate own preference models?
• Requires expertise in decision modelling
 Not easily applicable with general public
Independent analysis of steering group
members' models with Web-HIPRE?
• Yes – less expertise required
Web-based learning material to help
understand the methods and software
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
4. Collecting and analysing public feedback
Web provides a very cheap way to collect
public opinions
Everyone does not have access to Web
• Possibility to alternative ways to participate, e.g.
by mail, should be provided
• Web tools can still be used by entering the
opinions from mail questionnaires
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Opinions-Online v.2.0
Easy-to-use interface
Different ways of setting priorities
• Ranking
• Approval voting
• Multiattribute rating
On-line analysis of the results
• Possibility to view results according to any field
on the questionnaire
• Differences between stakeholder groups
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Opinions-Online - Creating a new session
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Opinions-Online - Analysis of results
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Opinions-Online Vote
Advanced voting rules
• Condorcet criteria
• Copeland’s methods, Dodgson’s method, Maximin
method
• Borda count
• Nanson’s method, University method
• Black’s method
• Plurality voting
• Coombs’ method, Hare system, Bishop method
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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
Discussion
Is Web participation too easy?
• How to assure that stakeholders examine the
different options thoroughly?
• E.g. in the Pirkanmaa Web questionnaire the
use of material provided on recommendations
remained low
 Learning of the regulation and understanding
of the other stakeholders' views may decrease
Committed interest from the public needed
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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
Where are we now? Can we speed up the
process?
 Creating the demand for a new tradition /
culture in electronic democracy
eLearning support sites will be useful
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Culture grows from positive case studies
Collaboration of DA researchers and policy
support administrators
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
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Conclusions
Tools for participation are available
The Web provides means to enhance public
participation
Possibility to use traditional ways
• All the people feel to be treated fairly
Commitment to the process needed by
administrators and planners
Can the public use DA tools independently?
This will take years
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
Web sites
Systems Analysis Laboratory: www.sal.hut.fi
Finnish Environment Institute: www.vyh.fi
Water Resources in Finland:
www.vyh.fi/eng/environ/state/waterre/waterre.htm
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
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology
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.
J. Mustajoki, R.P. Hämäläinen and M. Marttunen (2003): Participatory
multicriteria decision support with Web-HIPRE: A case of lake regulation
policy. Manuscript. Downloadable at www.sal.hut.fi/Publications/pdffiles/mmusb.pdf
S ystems
Analysis Laboratory
Helsinki University of Technology