Applying a Multi-Criteria Project Portfolio Tool in Selecting Energy Peat Production Areas

Mikko Kurttila, Arto Haara, Artti Juutinen, Jouni Karhu, Paavo Ojanen, Jouni Pykäläinen, Miia Saarimaa, Oili Tarvainen, Sakari Sarkkola and Anne Tolvanen
Additional contact information
Mikko Kurttila: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland
Arto Haara: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland
Artti Juutinen: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-90014 Oulu, Finland
Jouni Karhu: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-90014 Oulu, Finland
Paavo Ojanen: Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, FI-00100 Helsinki, Finland
Jouni Pykäläinen: Faculty of Science and Forestry, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland
Miia Saarimaa: Forestry Centre Finland, FI-90100 Oulu, Finland
Oili Tarvainen: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-90014 Oulu, Finland
Sakari Sarkkola: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland
Anne Tolvanen: Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), FI-90014 Oulu, Finland

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 5, 1-16

Abstract: This study demonstrates the characteristics of the new generic project portfolio selection tool YODA (“Your Own Decision Aid”). YODA does not include a mathematical aggregation model. Instead, the decision maker’s preferences are defined by the interactive articulation of acceptance thresholds of project-level decision criteria. Transparency and ease of adopting the method in participatory planning are sought using the method’s simple preference input. The characteristics of the YODA tool are introduced by presenting how it has been applied in participatory land use planning in northern Finland in selecting a combination of peat production sites to attain the goals defined at municipal level. In this process, each stakeholder first constructed a project portfolio that best met his or her preferences. In doing this, acceptance thresholds for project-level decision criteria were defined. In total, eight decision criteria were related to economic value, biodiversity, social impacts, and ecosystem services. Subsequently, the portfolios of different stakeholders were combined in line with the principles of robust portfolio modelling. Core projects were accepted by all stakeholders, while exterior projects were not accepted, and borderline projects by some of the stakeholders. Although the land use planning situation at hand was highly sensitive, because it was related to various aspects of sustainability, the use of YODA provided useful results. The first meeting with stakeholders identified 52 out of 99 sites that none of the stakeholders would use for energy peat production, due to their characteristics, whereas, in the second meeting, a smaller stakeholder group found 18 core projects and 26 borderline projects which could be potential areas for energy peat production. We conclude that YODA—as a generic project portfolio tool—can be used in various planning situations.

Keywords: multi-criteria decision support; participatory approach; peat production; project portfolio selection; robust portfolio modelling; stakeholders (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1705/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1705/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:1705-:d:324877

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().