SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Literature Cited

  • Armbruster, W., and W. Boge. 1983. Efficient, anonymous, and neutral group decisions. Econimetrica 51:13891405.
  • Arrow, K. 1951. Social choice and individual values. Wiley, New York.
  • Black, D. 1958. The theory of committees and elections. Cambridge University Press, London, United Kingdom.
  • Brams, S. J. 2004. Approval voting. In Rowley, C. and F. Schneider (eds.) The encyclopedia of public choice. Kluwer, Dordrecht 344346. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-306-47828-4_34.
  • Brams, S. J., and M. R. Sanver. 2006. Critical strategies under approval voting: who gets ruled in and ruled out. Electoral Studies 25:287305.
  • Brown, L. E., et al. 2010. Priority water research questions as determined by UK practitioners and policy makers. Science of the Total Environment 409:256266.
  • Burgman, M. A. 2005. Risks and decisions for conservation and environmental management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Burgman M. A., A. Carr, L. Godden, R. Gregory, M. McBride, L. Flander, and L. A. Maguire. 2011. Redefining expertise and improving ecological judgment. Conservation Letters 4:8187.
  • Chakravarty, S., and T. R. Kaplan. 2010. Vote or shout. The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics 10(1): Article 42. Available from www.bepress.com/bejte/vol10/iss1/art42.
  • Chee, Y. E. 2004. An ecological perspective on the valuation of ecosystem services. Biological Conservation 120:549565.
  • Cooke, R. M. 1991. Experts in uncertainty: opinion and subjective probability in science. Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Craven, J. 1992. Social choice: a framework for collective decision and individual judgments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Dicks, L. V., D. A. Showler, and W.J. Sutherland. 2010. Bee conservation: evidence for the effects of interventions. Pelagic Publications, Exeter.
  • Dodgson, C. L. 1876. A method of taking votes on more than two issues. Reprinted in Black, D. 1958. The theory of committees and elections. Cambridge University Press, London, United Kingdom.
  • Elkind, E., P. Faliszewski, and A. Slinko. 2011. Homogeneity and monotonicity of distance-rationalizable voting rules. Pages 821828 in K. Tumer, P. Yolum, L. Sonenberg, and P. Stone, editors. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Taipei, Taiwan.
  • Fishburn, P. C. 1977. Condorcet social choice functions. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 33:469489.
  • Fishburn, P. C., and S. J. Brams. 1983. Paradoxes of preferential voting. Mathematics Magazine 56:207214.
  • French, S. 1986. Decision theory: an introduction to the mathematics of rationality. Ellis Horwood, Chichester, United Kingdom.
  • Gehrlein, W. V. 1983. Condorcet's paradox. Theory and Decision 15:161197.
  • Ghanbarpour, M. R., K. W. Hipel, and K. C. Abbaspour. 2005. Prioritizing long-term watershed management strategies using group decision analysis. International Journal of Water Resources Development 21:297309.
  • Gibbard, A. 1973. Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result. Econometrica 41:587601.
  • Gavish, B., and J. H. Gerdes. 1997. Voting mechanisms and their implications in a GDSS environment. Annals of Operations Research 71:4174.
  • Gregory, R. S., and R. L. Keeney. 2002. Making smarter environmental management decisions. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38:16011612.
  • Hämäläinen, R., E. Kettunen, M. Marttunun, and H. Ehtamo. 2001. Evaluating a framework for multi-stakeholder decision support in water resources management. Group Decisions and Negotiation 10:331353.
  • Hiltunen, V., J. Kangas, and J. Pykalainen. 2008. Voting methods in strategic forest planning—experiences from Metsahallitus. Forest Policy and Economics 10:117127.
  • Hodge, J. K., and R. E. Klima. 2005. The mathematics of voting and elections: a hands-on approach. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
  • Hwang C. L., and M. Lin. 1987. Group decision-making: mathematical models. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
  • Jones, B., B. Radcliff, C. Taber, and R. Timpone. 1995. Condorcet winners and the paradox of voting: probability calculations for weak preference orders. American Political Science Review 89:137144.
  • Kangas, J., and A. Kangas. 2002. Multiple criteria decision support methods in forest management. Pages 3770 in T. Pukkala, editor. Multi-objective forest management, chapter 3. Kluwer, Netherlands.
  • Kangas, A., S. Laukkanen, and J. Kangas. 2006. Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest managementa review. Forest Policy and Economics 9:7792.
  • Keeney, R. 1992. Value-focused thinking: a path to creative decision making. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Kemeny, J. 1959. Mathematics without numbers. Daedalus 88:577591.
  • Kerr, N. L., and R. S. Tindale. 2004. Small group decision making and performance. Annual Review of Psychology 55:623656.
  • Kijazi, M. H., and S. Kant. 2010. Forest stakeholders’ value preferences in Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Forest Policy and Economics 12:357369.
  • Klahr, D. 1966. A computer simulation of the paradox of voting. American Political Science Review 60:384390.
  • Laukkanen, S., T. Palander, J. Kangas, and A. Kangas. 2005. Evaluation of the multicriteria approval method for timber-harvesting group decision support. Silva Fenn 39:249264.
  • Leal, C. P., R. A. Quinones, and C. Chavez. 2010. What factors affect the decision making process when setting TACs?: The case of Chilean fisheries. Marine Policy 34:11831195.
  • Lehtinen, A. 2008. The welfare consequences of strategic behaviour under approval and plurality voting. European Journal of Political Economy 24:688704.
  • Lepelley, D., and F. Valognes. 2003. Voting rules, manipulability and social homogeneity. Public Choice 116:165184.
  • McNeill, J., and N. J. Turland. 2010. The conservation of Acacia with Acacia penninervis as conserved type. Taxon 59:613616.
  • Maguire, L. A. 2004. What can decision analysis do for invasive species management? Risk Analysis 24:859868.
  • Marcot, B. G., P. A. Hohenlohe, S. Morey, R. Holmes, R. Molina, M. C. Turley, M. H. Huff, and J. A. Laurence. 2006. Characterizing species at risk II: Using Bayesian Belief Networks as decision support tools to determine species conservation categories under the Northwest Forest Plan. Ecology and Society:11:12. Available from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art12/
  • Mendoza, G. A., and R. Prabhu. 2009. Evaluating multi-stakeholder perceptions of project impacts: a participatory value based multi-criteria approach. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 16:177190.
  • Morgan, M. G., and M. Henrion. 1990. Uncertainty: a guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Morton, S. R., et al. 2009. The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia. Austral Ecology 34:19.
  • Nanson, E. J. 1883. Methods of election. Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria 19:197240.
  • Nurmi, H. 2012. On the relevance of theoretical results to voting system choice. Pages 255274 in D.S. Felsenthal, and M. Machover, editors. Electoral systems. Studies in choice and welfare, chapter 10. Springer, Berlin.
  • Patterson, J., M. E. Meek, J. E. Strawson, and R. G. Liteplo. 2007. Engaging expert peers in the development of risk assessments. Risk Analysis 27:16091621.
  • Phillips, S. J., A. Archer, R. L. Pressey, D. Torkornoo, D. Applegate, D. Johnson, and M. W. Watts. 2010. Voting power and target-based site prioritization. Biological Conservation 143:19891997.
  • Poundstone, W. 2008. Gaming the vote: why elections aren't fair (and what we can do about it). Hill and Wang, New York.
  • Richelson, J. T. 1981. A comparative analysis of social choice functions IV. Behavioral Science 26:346353.
  • Riker, W. 1982. Liberalism against Populism: a confrontation between the theory of democracy and the theory of social choice. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
  • Risse, M. 2001. Arrow's theorem, indeterminacy, and multiplicity reconsidered. Ethics 111:706734.
  • Saari, D. G. 2001. Decisions and elections: explaining the unexpected. University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  • Saaty, T. L. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New York.
  • Satterthwaite, M. 1975. Strategy proofness and Arrow's conditions. Journal of Economic Theory 10:187217.
  • Sen, A. 1999. The possibility of social choice. American Economic Review 89:349378.
  • Slovic, P. 1999. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis 19:689701.
  • Sutherland, W. J. et al. 2009. One hundred questions of importance to the conservation of global biological diversity. Conservation Biology 23:557567.
  • Tangian, A. S. 2000. Unlikelihood of Condorcet's paradox in a large society. Social Welfare and Choice 17:337365.
  • Taylor, A. D. 1995. Mathematics and politics: strategy, voting, power and proof. Springer-Verlag, New York.
  • Thomas, C. W., A. B. Soule, and T. B. Davis. 2010. Special interest capture of regulatory agencies: a ten-year analysis of voting behavior on regional fishery management councils. Policy Studies Journal 38:447464.
  • Tisdell, C., C. Wilson, and H. S. Nantha. 2006. Public choice of species for the ‘Ark’: Phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. Journal for Nature Conservation 14:97105.
  • Vignola, R., T. L. McDaniels, and R. W. Scholz. 2012. Negotiation analysis for mechanisms to deliver ecosystem services: The case of soil conservation in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 75:2231.
  • Williams, P. D. 2006. The greening of the Queensland electorate? Australian Journal of Political Science 41:325337.
  • Zendehdel, K., M. Rademaker, B. De Baets, and G. Van Huylenbroeck. 2010. Environmental decision making with conflicting social groups: a case study of the Lar rangeland in Iran. Journal of Arid Environments 74:394402.