MCM Recommended Readings
How can I quickly get my head around what MCM is and how it fits in and differs from other approaches?
A summary of the first ever MCM project: Stirling, A., Mayer, S., Vines, G. (1999). A summary of the first multicriteria mapping project, looking at options for sustainable food production, Rethinking Risk Project, University of Sussex.
An overview of one application of the method: Stirling, A., Lobstein, T., & Millstone, E. (2007). Methodology for obtaining stakeholder assessments of obesity policy options in the PorGrow project. Obesity Reviews, 8, 17–27. doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2007.00355.x
Summaries of Using MCM with Deliberative Panels:
Where has MCM been used well in practice?
On communal growing activities in the UK: White, R. & Stirling, A. (2013). Sustaining trajectories towards Sustainability: Dynamics and diversity in UK communal growing activities, Global Environment Change, 23(5), 838–846
On climate mitigation or geoengineering options: Bellamy, R., Chilvers, J., & Vaughan, N. E. (2014). Deliberative Mapping of options for tackling climate change : Citizens and specialists “ open up ” appraisal of geoengineering. Public Understanding of Science, September, 1–18. doi:10.1177/0963662514548628
Bellamy, R., Chilvers, J., Vaughan, N. E., & Lenton, T. M. (2013). “Opening up” geoengineering appraisal: Multi-Criteria Mapping of options for tackling climate change. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 926–937. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.011
On nanotechnology applications in Denmark: Hansen, S. F. (2010). Multicriteria mapping of stakeholder preferences in regulating nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12(6), 1959–1970. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-010-0006-3
On agricultural strategies in Kenya: Thompson, J. (2009). Environmental Change & Maize Innovation in Kenya: Exploring pathways in and out of maize, Brighton: STEPS Centre.
On counter-obesity policy options across Europe: E. Millstone, T. Lobstein, A. Stirling, L. Mohebati et al, Policy options for responding to obesity: cross-national report of the PorGrow project, report of the EC PorGrow Project, SPRU, University of Sussex, August 2006
A summary of this project: Lobstein, T., & Millstone, E. (2006). Policy options for responding to obesity: evaluating the options, Summary report of the EC PorGrow Project. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex. Retrieved from http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/15213/
On health strategies to address ‘the kidney gap’ in the UK: Davies, G., Burgess, J., Eames, M., Mayer, S., Statley, K., Stirling, A., & Williamson, S. (2003). Deliberative Mapping: Appraising options for addressing the “Kidney Gap”, Final Report to the Wellcome Trust. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex. Retrieved from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/189718/
A summary of this project: Burgess, J., Davies, G., & Stirling, A. (2003). Deliberative Mapping: Appraising options for addressing the “Kidney Gap”, Executive Summary to the Wellcome Trust. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex.
On GM and alternative agricultural strategies: Mayer, S., & Stirling, A. (2002). Finding a precautionary approach to technological developments–lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15, 57–71.
Stirling, A., & Mayer, S. (2001). A novel approach to the appraisal of technological risk: A multicriteria mapping study of a genetically modified crop. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19, 529–555. doi:10.1068/c8s
On alternative trajectories for the hydrogen economy: McDowall, W. Eames, M. (2007). Towards a sustainable hydrogen economy: A multi-criteria sustainability appraisal of competing hydrogen futures, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 32, Issue 18, December 2007, Pages 4611-4626, ISSN 0360-3199, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.06.020.
[coming soon] On energy and transport options in Kolkata and Bangkok: Raven, R., Ghosh, B., Wieczorek, A., & Stirling, A. (2015) Unpacking sustainabilities in socio-technical transitions. Solar photovoltaic and urban mobility experiments in India and Thailand.
What are the detailed ways in which MCM differs from comparable approaches?
For appraising social values in nature and ecosystems: Coburn, J. & Stirling, A. (2014) SPRU Report to the SPLiCE Project: A Review of 'Social Appraisal' Methodologies, Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex, September 2014.
For advancing social justice in the Global South: Gerber, J. F. (2013). Guide to Multicriteria Evaluation for Environmental Justice Organisations, EJOLT Report No.: 08, February 2013.
For appraising UK Government policy options: Dodgson, J., Spackman, M., Pearman, A., & Phillips, L. (2009). Multi-criteria analysis: a manual. London: Department for Communities and Local Government. doi:10.1002/mcda.399
For sustainability valuation: Stagl, S. (2007). SDRN rapid research and evidence review on emerging methods for sustainability valuation and appraisal. SDRN. Retrieved from http://www.sd-research.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Emerging%20Methods%20for%20Sustainability%20Valuation%20and%20Appraisal_0.pdf
An analysis of key related issues in international technology assessment: A. Ely, P. van Zwanenberg, A. Stirling, Opening up technology assessment: new approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation,Research Policy, 43(3) 2014, 505–518.
A summary of some of the general policy issues: A. Stirling, A view of ‘Deliberate Futures’, looking at precaution and progress in technology choice – produced by the Sustainable Development Research Network, 2005
Where are some good discussions of the theoretical grounding of MCM?
A short general overview of issues in science advice: Stirling, A. (2010). Keep it complex. Nature, 468, 1029–1031. doi:10.1038/4681029a
A deeper analysis of issues in participation: Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “closing down”: Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(2), 262–294. doi:10.1177/0162243907311265
A focus on particular issues in decision analysis: Stirling, A. (2006). Analysis, participation and power: Justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis. Land Use Policy, 23, 95–107. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010
A summary of some key related issues in technology assessment: Stirling, A. (2011). ‘Opening Up’: New models of technology assessment for development, From STEPS Working Paper 45: New Models of Technology Assessment for Development, STEPS briefing, Brighton: STEPS Centre.
What practical guidance is there to help with MCM?