Many of the techniques for making decisions, including land use, depend on the weight assigned for each criterion. These criteria can be based on a panel of experts’ opinions, who assess certain decisions’ influence on the final objectives. These opinions should be contrasted to decide if they are used or select the ones used to achieve an internal coherence. In this study, we evaluate the responses provided by an expert panel in the context of future environmental management of an agroforestry territory in the Salta Province (Argentina). The experts belong to different entities in the studied area, such as Universities, Research Centers, Administrative Authorities, Associations, and non-governmental organizations. They evaluated five productive techniques’ influence on 31 criteria related to environmental, social, and economic consequences. The Kendall’s Tau correlation coefficient between each pair of experts’ opinions is proposed to measure the rate of agreement among the expert panel answers. From these coefficients, a concordance matrix is generated. Based on this matrix, dendrograms are created to group the experts. In this case study, the results show two productive techniques with a high discordance rate, while the other three have a higher agreement among the expert panelists. The influence of these results in a multicriteria decision about the productive use of land is evaluated.