S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 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 Opinions-Online ( Platform for global participation, voting, surveys, and group decisions Web-HIPRE ( Value tree based decision analysis and support Joint Gains ( 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: 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

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 Public Web- HIPRE Opinions- Online Web Site Decision on recommendations Steering Group Results to Web Preference elicitation Analysis of results Preference elicitation Information FeedbackAnalysis of the feedback Analysis of the feedback Information Analysis of results Web Independent use Assisted use Framework for the use of Web Results to Web

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 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: Finnish Environment Institute: Water Resources in Finland: Lake Päijänne project: Lake Kallavesi project: Pirkanmaa lakes project: Decisionarium:

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, 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, (in Finnish) J. Mustajoki and R.P.Hämäläinen (2000): Web-HIPRE: Global decision support by value tree and AHP analysis, INFOR, 38(3), 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), 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 files/mmusb.pdf