Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Voting systems for environmental decisions.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Burgman, MA; Regan, HM; Maguire, LA; Colyvan, M; Justus, J; Martin, TG; Rothley, K
Published in: Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
April 2014

Voting systems aggregate preferences efficiently and are often used for deciding conservation priorities. Desirable characteristics of voting systems include transitivity, completeness, and Pareto optimality, among others. Voting systems that are common and potentially useful for environmental decision making include simple majority, approval, and preferential voting. Unfortunately, no voting system can guarantee an outcome, while also satisfying a range of very reasonable performance criteria. Furthermore, voting methods may be manipulated by decision makers and strategic voters if they have knowledge of the voting patterns and alliances of others in the voting populations. The difficult properties of voting systems arise in routine decision making when there are multiple criteria and management alternatives. Because each method has flaws, we do not endorse one method. Instead, we urge organizers to be transparent about the properties of proposed voting systems and to offer participants the opportunity to approve the voting system as part of the ground rules for operation of a group.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology

DOI

EISSN

1523-1739

ISSN

1523-1739

Publication Date

April 2014

Volume

28

Issue

2

Start / End Page

322 / 332

Related Subject Headings

  • Politics
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Humans
  • Environment
  • Ecology
  • Decision Making
  • Conservation of Natural Resources
  • Cognition
  • 4104 Environmental management
  • 3109 Zoology
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Burgman, M. A., Regan, H. M., Maguire, L. A., Colyvan, M., Justus, J., Martin, T. G., & Rothley, K. (2014). Voting systems for environmental decisions. Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 28(2), 322–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12209
Burgman, Mark A., Helen M. Regan, Lynn A. Maguire, Mark Colyvan, James Justus, Tara G. Martin, and Kris Rothley. “Voting systems for environmental decisions.Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology 28, no. 2 (April 2014): 322–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12209.
Burgman MA, Regan HM, Maguire LA, Colyvan M, Justus J, Martin TG, et al. Voting systems for environmental decisions. Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology. 2014 Apr;28(2):322–32.
Burgman, Mark A., et al. “Voting systems for environmental decisions.Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, vol. 28, no. 2, Apr. 2014, pp. 322–32. Epmc, doi:10.1111/cobi.12209.
Burgman MA, Regan HM, Maguire LA, Colyvan M, Justus J, Martin TG, Rothley K. Voting systems for environmental decisions. Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology. 2014 Apr;28(2):322–332.
Journal cover image

Published In

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology

DOI

EISSN

1523-1739

ISSN

1523-1739

Publication Date

April 2014

Volume

28

Issue

2

Start / End Page

322 / 332

Related Subject Headings

  • Politics
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Humans
  • Environment
  • Ecology
  • Decision Making
  • Conservation of Natural Resources
  • Cognition
  • 4104 Environmental management
  • 3109 Zoology