東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Understanding Stakeholder Preference...

Loos, Jonathon R.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications./
作者:	Loos, Jonathon R.
面頁冊數:	99 p.
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 55-03.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International55-03(E).
標題:	Environmental economics. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10006596
ISBN:	9781339443522

Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications.
Loos, Jonathon R.

Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications. - 99 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 55-03.

Thesis (M.S.)--Plymouth State University, 2015.

Inland flooding is one of the most damaging natural hazard events each year in New Hampshire and the United States, the risk of which can be influenced by changes in land use and climate. Initiatives toward climate adaptation are increasingly interested in the use of ecosystem provided capital and infrastructure in preparing for climate impacts such as flooding. While ecosystem-based adaptation offers a new way of responding and preparing for future flood, little is known on how stakeholders perceive ecosystem-based alternatives versus more traditional built options. Through the use of stakeholder engaged decision scenarios and a multi-criteria framework for decision analysis, we aim to understand what drives preferences for flood mitigation and adaptation alternatives and the perceived value of ecosystem-based projects in these selections. This was completed through a four-step process that included: 1) identification of issues and stakeholder groups, 2) stakeholder engagement and value gathering, 3) construction of decision scenarios and project matrices, and 4) workshop implementation and evaluation. We find that attributes of effectiveness and environmental impact are most important to consider in comparing flood mitigation and adaptation alternatives by stakeholders engaged here. While ecosystem services were not always the most highly valued aspects of different alternatives, we found strong preference for some ecosystem-based flood mitigation and adaptation methods such as soft-bank stabilization techniques and wetland conservation. We conclude that for ecosystem-based flood preparation options to be selected at the municipal level, they must be demonstrably effective and technically achievable. Lasting impacts and experiences from recent and highly damaging flood events in New Hampshire and Vermont are thought to be playing a determining role in motivating stakeholders to value effectiveness of flood mitigation and adaptation efforts. This methodology is relevant and reproducible for many types of local decision makers across the United States and abroad.

ISBN: 9781339443522Subjects--Topical Terms:

535179
Environmental economics.

Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications.
LDR:02982nmm a2200277 4500 001 2115124
005 20170217105117.5
008 180830s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781339443522
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10006596
035 $a AAI10006596
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Loos, Jonathon R. $3 3276760
245 1 0 $a Understanding Stakeholder Preferences for Flood Adaptation Alternatives with Ecosystem Service Implications.
300 $a 99 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 55-03.
500 $a Adviser: Shannon H. Rogers.
502 $a Thesis (M.S.)--Plymouth State University, 2015.
520 $a Inland flooding is one of the most damaging natural hazard events each year in New Hampshire and the United States, the risk of which can be influenced by changes in land use and climate. Initiatives toward climate adaptation are increasingly interested in the use of ecosystem provided capital and infrastructure in preparing for climate impacts such as flooding. While ecosystem-based adaptation offers a new way of responding and preparing for future flood, little is known on how stakeholders perceive ecosystem-based alternatives versus more traditional built options. Through the use of stakeholder engaged decision scenarios and a multi-criteria framework for decision analysis, we aim to understand what drives preferences for flood mitigation and adaptation alternatives and the perceived value of ecosystem-based projects in these selections. This was completed through a four-step process that included: 1) identification of issues and stakeholder groups, 2) stakeholder engagement and value gathering, 3) construction of decision scenarios and project matrices, and 4) workshop implementation and evaluation. We find that attributes of effectiveness and environmental impact are most important to consider in comparing flood mitigation and adaptation alternatives by stakeholders engaged here. While ecosystem services were not always the most highly valued aspects of different alternatives, we found strong preference for some ecosystem-based flood mitigation and adaptation methods such as soft-bank stabilization techniques and wetland conservation. We conclude that for ecosystem-based flood preparation options to be selected at the municipal level, they must be demonstrably effective and technically achievable. Lasting impacts and experiences from recent and highly damaging flood events in New Hampshire and Vermont are thought to be playing a determining role in motivating stakeholders to value effectiveness of flood mitigation and adaptation efforts. This methodology is relevant and reproducible for many types of local decision makers across the United States and abroad.
590 $a School code: 0571.
650 4 $a Environmental economics. $3 535179
650 4 $a Environmental engineering. $3 548583
690 $a 0438
690 $a 0775
710 2 $a Plymouth State University. $b Environmental Science & Policy. $3 3276761
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 55-03(E).
790 $a 0571
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10006596