Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation is a kind of multi-criteria analysis that combines the technical evaluation of different options according to various assessment criteria with the analysis of the social actors' conflicting values and interests.Two main ideas are at the basis of SMCE: technical incommensurability (i.e. in a complex environment one cannot express all impacts of a policy using one only unit of measurement, or, in other words, an inter/multidisciplinary analysis is needed) and social incommensurability (i.e. the social actors have different and legitimately conflicting values and interests, which must be taken into account when evaluating a policy or a project).SMCE was applied to two case-studies. In the first one, the problem at hand was how to provide some isolated rural households in a natural park near Barcelona with electricity, whether by extending the grid or installing stand-alone photovoltaic systems. The issue caused a conflict between 1995 and 2000 among the Park administration (in favour of solar energy) and the household inhabitants and owners, plus the Mayor (in favour of traditional electricity). A retrospective SMCE was performed in order to explain the positions of the involved stakeholders and the factors that help the diffusion of off-grid photovoltaic systems in rural areas.The second part of the thesis deals with the opportunity for the Italian government of supporting a large-scale biofuels production. The pros and cons of satisfying part of the energy need of the transport sector with biodiesel were analyzed through a variety of assessment criteria and taking into account different scales and dimensions.

<p dir="ltr">Conservation conflicts, commonly defined as “situations that occur when two or more parties with strongly held opinions clash over conservation objectives, and when one party is perceived to assert its interests at the expense of another” (Redpath et al., 2013) are expected within the realm of public land management. Conservation conflicts have been an increasing issue worldwide as the consumption of natural resources can directly oppose conservation efforts. Quantitative and qualitative approaches have been adopted in similar studies to mitigate or resolve conservation conflicts. This thesis focuses on a 2017 conflict over logging in Yellowwood State Forest in Indiana. The Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE) framework was applied in this thesis to examine economic, ecological, and recreational criteria from multiple stakeholders' perspectives and understand how a retrospective assessment can contribute to improved conflict resolution. The study follows four steps: conducting an institutional analysis, defining criteria and potential alternative scenarios, generating an impact matrix through surveys and interviews, and aggregating results for cross-scenario comparison. The design of these steps attempts to engage stakeholders in the decision-making process and increase transparency. The ranking results reveal a clear preference for the “Shelterwood Cuts” alternative, indicating that different actions may have been a better solution. Although the methodology alone cannot make decisions, it can aid the decision-maker in creating a solution to a conservation conflict by providing guidance and bringing attention to the aspects of a conflict that require change.</p>