A comparison of multiple criteria analysis and unaided approaches to environmental decision making

This study compares multiple criteria analysis (MCA) assisted decisions and unaided decisions in an environmental management context. It involved 55 decision makers in Queensland, Australia, who used MCA techniques to evaluate environmental projects alongside their own intuitive approaches under the Australian Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) program. The NHT is Australia's largest environmental program funded over A$ 2.5 billion over 10 years. The study assessed decision maker learning and perceptions of MCA's overall usefulness. It was found that MCA produced markedly different results to unaided evaluations. Feedback from decision makers typically showed that unaided decisions did not make explicit use of evaluation criteria. Even though most decision makers were unwilling to change their choices following the use of MCA, they found it a helpful input to their decision procedure. The majority of decision makers supported the adoption of MCA to make future investment decisions under the NHT program.