Cross-scale and integrative prioritization of multi-functionality in large river floodplains.

Floodplains provide an extraordinary quantity and quality of ecosystem services (ES) but are among the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. The uses and transformations of floodplains differ widely within and between regions. In recent decades, the diverse pressures and requirements for flood protection, drinking water resource protection, biodiversity, and adaptation to climate change have shown that multi-functional floodplain management is necessary. Such an integrative approach has been hampered by the various interests of different sectors of society, as represented by multiple stakeholders and legal principles. We present an innovative framework for integrated floodplain management building up on ES multi-functionality and stakeholder involvement, forming a scientifically based decision-support to prioritize adaptive management measures responding at the basin and local scales. To demonstrate its potential and limitations, we applied this cross-scaled approach in the world's most international and culturally diverse basin, the Danube River Basin in Europe. We conducted large-scale evaluations of anthropogenic pressures and ES capacities on the one hand and participatory modelling of the local socio-ecohydrological systems on the other hand. Based on our assessments of 14 ES and 8 pressures, we recommend conservation measures along the lower and middle Danube, restoration measures along the upper-middle Danube and Sava, and mitigation measures in wide parts of the Yantra, Tisza and upper Danube rivers. In three case study areas across the basin, stakeholder perceptions were generally in line with the large-scale evaluations on ES and pressures. The positive outcomes of jointly modelled local measures and large-scale synergistic ES relationships suggest that multi-functionality can be enhanced across scales. Trade-offs were mainly present with terrestrial provisioning ES at the basin scale and locally with recreational activities. Utilizing the commonalities between top-down prioritizations and bottom-up participatory approaches and learning from their discrepancies could make ecosystem-based management more effective and inclusive.

Group assessment of key indicators of sustainable waste management in developing countries.

Decision makers in developing countries are struggling to solve the present problems of solid waste management. Prioritisation and ranking of the most important indicators that influence the waste management system is very useful for any decision maker for the future planning and implementation of a sustainable waste management system. The aim of this study is to evaluate key indicators and their related sub-indicators in a group decision-making environment. In order to gain insight into the subject it was necessary to obtain the qualified opinions of decision makers from different countries who understand the situation in the sector of waste management in developing countries. An assessment is performed by 43 decision makers from both developed and developing countries, and the applied methodology is based on a combined use of the analytic hierarchy process, from the multi-criteria decision-making set of tools, and the preferential voting method known as Borda Count, which belongs to social choice theory. Pairwise comparison of indicators is performed with the analytic hierarchy process, and the ranking of indicators once obtained is assessed with Borda Count. Detailed analysis of the final results showed that the Institutional-Administrative indicator was the most important one, with the maximum weight as derived by both groups of decision makers. The results also showed that the combined use of the analytic hierarchy process and Borda Count contributes to the credibility and objectivity of the decision-making process, allowing its use in more complex waste management group decision-making problems to be recommended.