10.2190/9F98-8RUP-24N0-6FBY 9F988RUP24N06FBY 2 Collective Decision Making on Locally Undesirable Land Uses 137 146 20020509 20020509 20020509 20020509 9F988RUP24N06FBY.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=9F988RUP24N06FBY 2 Joni S. James Charles Cecilia Temponi Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos We use "fuzzy" analysis to give more language flexibility to outcomes of collective decision making about locally undesirable land uses (LULUs). We briefly review methods of collective decision making on LULUs for examples of decision environments which use public participation and expert opinion to moderate the conflicts found on this type of issue. We then present the strengths and weaknesses of one such decision environment, the Public Value Forum (PVF), where the traditional analytical and diagnostic tools of multiattribute utility theory and value free analysis are used. Using a scenario of stakeholders deciding on the appropriate use for a hazardous waste facility, we contrast the outcomes of the PVF with those that could be obtained if fuzzy analysis were used. Fuzzy analysis can provide a more transparent outcome of the decision process than the PVF because its use of linguistic variables offers decision makers final expressions of preferences over alternative choices that go beyond that of reject or accept. N. Cohen, Technical Assistance for Citizen Participation: A Case Study of New York City's Environmental Planning Process, <i>American Review of Public Administration, 25</i>:2, pp. 119-135, June 1995. D. von Winterfeldt and W. Edwards, Patterns of Conflict about Risky Technologies, <i>Risk Analysis, 4</i>:1, pp. 55-68, 1984. P. R. Kleindorfer and H. C. Kunreuther (eds.), <i>Insuring and Managing Hazardous Risks: From Seveso to Bhopal and Beyond</i>, Springer-Verlag, Berlin; New York, 1987. W. H. Desvousges and V. K. Smith, Focus Groups and Risk Communication: The "Science" of Listening to Data, <i>Risk Analysis, 8</i>:4, pp. 479-483, 1988. R. L. Heath and K. Nathan, Public Relations' Role in Risk Communication: Information, Rhetoric and Power, <i>Public Relations Quarterly, 35</i>:4, pp. 15-22, 1990-91. S. Young, Combining NIMBY with Risk Communication, <i>Public Relations Quarterly, 35</i>:2, pp. 22-26, 1990. R. L. Keeney, D. V. Winterfeldt, and T. Eppel, Eliciting Public Values for Complex Policy Decisions, <i>Management Science, 36</i>:9, pp. 1011-1030, 1990. A. Vatn and D. W. Bromley, Choices without Prices without Apologies, <i>Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26</i>, pp. 129-148, 1984. K. J. Arrow, <i>Social Choice and Individual Values</i> (2nd Edition), Yale University Press, London, 1963. E. F. Harrison, Inter-Disciplinary Models of Decision Making, <i>Management Decision, 31</i>:8, pp. 27-34, 1993. L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy Sets, <i>Information and Control, 8</i>, pp. 338-353, 1965. C. Temponi, Convergency of Fuzzy Systems and Enterprise Modeling, <i>Journal of Advances in Systems Science and Applications</i>, pp. 312-318, 1995. C. Temponi and J. S. J. Charles, Fuzzy Systems Views on Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Decisions, in <i>Proceedings of the World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, SCI 1997</i>, International Institute of Informatics and Systemics, Caracas, Venezuela, 1997. C. V. Negoita, <i>Fuzzy Systems</i>, Abacus Press, 1981. W. Pedrycz, <i>Fuzzy Control and Fuzzy Systems</i>, Research Studies Press Ltd., England, 1993. G. J. Klir and B. Yuan, <i>Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic</i>, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1995. T. A. Saaty, <i>Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process</i>, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1988.