1. Mika Marttunen Finnish Environment Institute R., P. Hämäläinen Helsinki University of Technology Project web page: www.paijanne.hut.fi DECISION ANALYSIS INTERVIEWS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF A LARGE REGULATED WATER COURSE

2. Finland STUDY AREA RiverKymijoki Lake LakePäijänne 200 km

3. MAIN INTERESTS OF LAKE PÄIJÄNNE AND RIVER KYMIJOKI (1/2) LAKE PÄIJÄNNE Area 1 116 km 2 Length of shoreline 2 248 km Maximum depth 95 m Mean depth 16 m Number of islands 988 LAKE PÄIJÄNNE Area 1 116 km 2 Length of shoreline 2 248 km Maximum depth 95 m Mean depth 16 m Number of islands 988 RIVER KYMIJOKI Length 180 km Mean flow 305 m 3 /s RIVER KYMIJOKI Length 180 km Mean flow 305 m 3 /s

4. MAIN INTERESTS OF LAKE PÄIJÄNNE AND RIVER KYMIJOKI RECREATIONAL USE 100 000 fishers 10 000 summer cottages FLOOD PROTECTION Hundreds of buildings situated in flood-risk areas 5 km 2 flood-prone fields HYDRO POWER 12 power plants 9 % of Finnish hydro power production

5. Regulated and ”natural” water levels of Lake Päijänne (1971-1999) ”Natural” Regulated NN+ m

6. Dissatisfaction among the users of Lake Päijänne Low water levels during spring Low water levels during spring Changes on littoral zone vegetation Changes on littoral zone vegetation Negative impacts on reproduction of fish Negative impacts on reproduction of fish

7. LAKE PÄIJÄNNE REGULATION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Project was carried out in 1995-1999Project was carried out in 1995-1999 Objective: To assess the possibilities to alleviate the adverse impacts of regulationObjective: To assess the possibilities to alleviate the adverse impacts of regulation –water levels and flows –fish stock management –maintenance –dissemination Steering groupSteering group –20 representatives of different stakeholders Total costs 1 million eurosTotal costs 1 million euros

8. Socially acceptable regulation regimes Ecologically sustainable regulation regimes Economically feasible regulation regimes GOAL: SUSTAINABLE REGULATION STRATEGY FOR LAKE PÄIJÄNNE

9. Many impacted groups - Over 20 interest groups Many impacted groups - Over 20 interest groups Multiple objectives - Hydro power, flood protection, recreational use, fishing, boating, floating environment, tourism etc. Multiple objectives - Hydro power, flood protection, recreational use, fishing, boating, floating environment, tourism etc. Several decision makers Several decision makers - Representatives of steering group Extensive data - 18 subprojects Extensive data - 18 subprojects Value tradeoffs Value tradeoffs - Ecological, social and economic impacts - Lake Päijänne and River Kymijoki DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM

10. Permit holder of the regulation licensePermit holder of the regulation license –Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (1) Regional and local authoritiesRegional and local authorities –Regional Environment Centres (5) –Regional Councils (3) –Employment and Economic Development Centre (3) –Municipality (1) Fishermen (3)Fishermen (3) Central Union of Agricultural producers and Forest Owners (1)Central Union of Agricultural producers and Forest Owners (1) Päijänne Nature Centre (1)Päijänne Nature Centre (1) Floating Association (1)Floating Association (1) Hydro power companies (1)Hydro power companies (1) STEERING GROUP

11. THE MAIN IMPACTS OF REGULATION IMPACTPÄIJÄNNEKYMIJOKI Flood protection ++++ Hydro power0 ++ Boating and floating ++ Recreational use - - (spring) + + + (summer) + Littoral ecosystem - -- Fish - -0 +++/--- strong, ++/-- moderate and +/- weak postive or negative impact

12. VALUE TRADEOFFS Between: impacts directed on Lake Päijänne and River Kymijokiimpacts directed on Lake Päijänne and River Kymijoki economic, ecological and social impactseconomic, ecological and social impacts different economic impactsdifferent economic impacts different ecological impactsdifferent ecological impacts different social impactsdifferent social impacts

13. How to reconcile the conflicting objectives? How to reconcile the conflicting objectives? How to efficiently utilize the collected data in decision making process? How to efficiently utilize the collected data in decision making process? QUESTIONS

14. THE GOAL WAS TO COMPILE RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH COULD BE ACCEPTED BY ALL STAKEHOLDERS LEARNING PROCESS Public participationImpact assessment CONSENSUS SOLUTION Methods supporting multi-objective decision making DISPUTES VALUE TREE ANALYSIS

15. DECISION ANALYSIS Methods applied in structuring and analysing extensive and complex decision problems dealing with subjective preferences and incommensurable criteriaMethods applied in structuring and analysing extensive and complex decision problems dealing with subjective preferences and incommensurable criteria MethodsMethods –Value tree analysis –Decision tree –Influence diagram

16. VALUE TREE INTERVIEWS All representatives of steering group were interviewed (20 persons)All representatives of steering group were interviewed (20 persons) Face to face and computer supportedFace to face and computer supported –Interactive –Direct feedback –HIPRE 3+ program Duration varied from 1,5 - 3 hoursDuration varied from 1,5 - 3 hours

17. To enhance the learning process of steering group Overall picture of the problem Overall picture of the problem Comparison of incommensurable factors Comparison of incommensurable factors To clarify values and opinions of different stakeholders Which impacts are perceived to be most important? Which impacts are perceived to be most important? Which are the most preferred and disliked alternatives? Which are the most preferred and disliked alternatives? How strong are the differences in the opinions between stakeholders? How strong are the differences in the opinions between stakeholders? THE OBJECTIVES OF INTERVIEWS

18. PHASES Stucture the decision problemStucture the decision problem –Value trees Assess the impact of each alternativeAssess the impact of each alternative –Outcomes for alternatives Determine preferences of decision makersDetermine preferences of decision makers –Weights for attributes Analysis of the resultsAnalysis of the results –Sensitivity analysis

19. THE BEST REGULATION PRACTICE NATURE FLOOD DAMAGES INDUSTRY RECREA- TIONAL USE AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTIONS LANDSCAPE HYDRO POWER FLOATING TOURISM USABILITY OF SHORELINE FISHING HABITATS FISH BIRDS ALTERNATIVES FLOODPREVENTION RECREATION ECOLOGICAL VALUE TREE FOR NORMAL WATER YEARS ENTER- PREUNERS

20. PHASES Stucture the decision problemStucture the decision problem –Value trees Assess the impacts of each alternativeAssess the impacts of each alternative –Measurement ratings Determine preferences of decision makersDetermine preferences of decision makers –Weights for attributes Analysis of the resultsAnalysis of the results –Sensitivity analysis

22. PHASES Stucture the decision problemStucture the decision problem –Value trees Assess the impact of each alternativeAssess the impact of each alternative –Outcomes for alternatives Determine preferences of decision makersDetermine preferences of decision makers –Weights for attributes Analysis of the resultsAnalysis of the results –Sensitivity analysis

24. PHASES Stucture the decision problemStucture the decision problem –Value trees Assess the impact of each alternativeAssess the impact of each alternative –Outcomes for alternatives Determine preferences of decision makersDetermine preferences of decision makers –Weights for attributes Analysis of the resultsAnalysis of the results –Sensitivity analysis

26. (NORMAL WATER YEAR)

27. CONCLUSIONS Value tree analysis enhanced the learning process of the steering groupValue tree analysis enhanced the learning process of the steering group –Improved overall picture of the problem –New information of the impacts of regulation –Clarification of own values –Improved understanding of the other stakeholders’ objectives The results of analysis were applied in the development of sustainable regulation strategyThe results of analysis were applied in the development of sustainable regulation strategy –Prioritizations of objectives in different water conditions

28. THE MOST IMPORTANT OBJECTIVES

29. Enough emphasis was paid on the preparation phase Enough emphasis was paid on the preparation phase Structuring the problem Structuring the problem Experiments with students and stakeholders Experiments with students and stakeholders Interviews were personal and interactive Interviews were personal and interactive The used program (HIPRE) was simple and clear The used program (HIPRE) was simple and clear Co-operation between practitioners and scientists Co-operation between practitioners and scientists Value tree analysis was tightly connected with DM Value tree analysis was tightly connected with DM ELEMENTS OF SUCCESS

30. RESULTS Based on the attribute weights three different groups characterised byBased on the attribute weights three different groups characterised by –emphasis on the original objectives of regulation (4 persons) –emphasis on recreational and nature values of Lake Päijänne (7 persons) –balanced ecological and economic values (7 persons)

31. MAIN INTERESTS OF LAKE PÄIJÄNNE AND RIVER KYMIJOKI

32. QUESTIONS Which impacts are perceived to be most important in different water years?Which impacts are perceived to be most important in different water years? Which are the most preferred and disliked alternatives?Which are the most preferred and disliked alternatives? How strong are the differences in the opinions between different stakeholders?How strong are the differences in the opinions between different stakeholders?

33. BIASES IN ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTS Main sources of biasesMain sources of biases –Psychological reasons –Structure of the value tree –Weighting methods Ways to reduce biasesWays to reduce biases –Background information and training –Flat and symmetric value tree –Interctive and iterative weighting procedure –Extra questions and arguments The role of analyst is crucialThe role of analyst is crucial

34. FROM GIS TO DECISION MAKING In large projects there are usually extensive data on the impacts of different alternativesIn large projects there are usually extensive data on the impacts of different alternatives GIS provides good opportonities to visualize data on e.g. ecological impactsGIS provides good opportonities to visualize data on e.g. ecological impacts Decision analysis methods can be applied to structure and analyse the extensive dataDecision analysis methods can be applied to structure and analyse the extensive data Need to dynamically link GIS systems and decision making modelsNeed to dynamically link GIS systems and decision making models