An integrated multi-criteria and cost-benefit framework for prioritizing coastal adaptation strategies: Evidence from Qatar

AbstractQatar's coastal zones face increasing threats from sea-level rise, storm surges, and flooding, creating a need for context-specific, sustainable adaptation strategies. Despite growing awareness of coastal vulnerability, systematic frameworks for evaluating adaptation options remain limited in the Gulf region. This study develops an integrated decision-support framework that combines multi-criteria analysis and economic assessment to identify and prioritize adaptation strategies. Stakeholder preferences were collected through a structured survey, with pairwise comparison data analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process to rank evaluation criteria and assess adaptation options. Indicator-based scoring and cost–benefit analysis were then applied to compare the ecological and economic performance of the selected adaptation options. Results reveal a strong stakeholder preference for nature-based solutions, such as mangrove restoration, which achieved a benefit–cost ratio of approximately 10 when accounting for avoided flood damages and ecosystem co-benefits. By contrast, dykes provided targeted protection though with lower cost-effectiveness and with limited ecological benefits. The findings demonstrate that combining stakeholder-driven analytical hierarchy process with cost-benefit analysis provides decision-makers with a practical framework for prioritizing ecologically and economically effective coastal adaptation strategies. This integrated approach offers transferable insights for decision-makers aiming to enhance resilience in data-scarce, arid coastal regions, and supports the development of Integrated Coastal Zone Management frameworks.