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

• Published in: Sustainability
• Main Authors: Mikko Kurttila, Arto Haara, Artti Juutinen, Jouni Karhu, Paavo Ojanen, Jouni Pykäläinen, Miia Saarimaa, Oili Tarvainen, Sakari Sarkkola, Anne Tolvanen
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2020
• Subjects: multi-criteria decision support; participatory approach; peat production; project portfolio selection; robust portfolio modelling; stakeholders; Environmental effects of industries and plants; TD194-195; Renewable energy sources; TJ807-830; Environmental sciences; GE1-350; Northern Finland
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051705; https://doaj.org/article/66d14dcc00d64373a27e456c1231d3e6

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.