Enhancing knowledge construction processes within multicriteria decision analysis: The Collaborative Value Modelling framework

This paper proposes a new Collaborative Value Modelling framework, that combines Delphi and multicriteria decision conferencing, to build widely informed evaluation models. Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is commonly used to help decision-makers and other stakeholders in complex evaluation contexts. Further to the technical soundness and meaningfulness of the methods and tools used, it is critical to design adequate social processes to promote shared understanding around key evaluation issues while capturing multiple stakeholders’ values and perspectives. Multicriteria decision conferencing processes have been typically adopted for collaborative modelling using MCDA methods in decision conferences with relatively small groups. Such a socio-technical approach has proven to be effective, in a variety of contexts, in creating a collaborative environment that enables surfacing individual beliefs, identifying common concerns, managing eventual value conflicts and promoting agreement in group model building. But, extending this framework to broader participatory contexts requires a different design of the social process, in order to ensure that model building captures the full panoply of points of view. This challenge can be tackled by enhancing multicriteria decision conferencing with an all-embracing (Web-)Delphi participatory process. We depart from the existing collaborative knowledge acquisition methodology to design, with the Delphi method, a participatory knowledge construction process that elicits and analyses individual judgemental knowledge from a (very) large and diverse number of stakeholders. The knowledge acquired is then digested by a small group of key-players, in a subsequent decision conferencing, to collaboratively develop a widely informed multicriteria evaluation model. This new Web-Delphi-decision conferencing social setting has been tested already in real complex evaluation contexts using a specific multicriteria method, the Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH), to develop a variety of value modelling activities. We call this socio-technical design the Collaborative Value Modelling framework. Here, we describe its real use to support the construction of value functions, focusing on how the judgemental knowledge collected flows between the participatory and collaborative stages of the framework. Results validate that enhancing MACBETH decision conferencing with an ex ante Web-Delphi process fosters higher participation and collaboration in multicriteria modelling.     

Procurement process: Decision by exclusion and pairwise comparisons

Two case studies illustrate multicriteria decision making techniques frequently used in procurement practice: least-cost sufficient performance and weighted utility optimization. Both techniques have defects and are rarely robust. Decision by exclusion and pairwise comparisons is proposed as a third approach which eliminates inferior alternatives by generalized forms of minimum performance requirements established under multicriteria framework. It is more robust and maintains high level of accountability.     

Multicriteria decision support for global e-government evaluation

E-government refers to the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) by governments to provide digital services to citizens and businesses over the Internet, at local, national or international level. Benchmarking and assessing e-government is therefore necessary to monitor performance and progress by individual countries and identify areas for improvement. Although such measurements have already been initiated by various organizations, they scarcely highlight the multidimensional nature of the assessment. This paper outlines a multicriteria methodology to evaluate e-government using a system of eight evaluation criteria that are built on four points of view: (1) infrastructures, (2) investments, (3) e-processes, and (4) users’ attitude. The overall evaluation is obtained through an additive value model which is assessed with the involvement of a single decision maker–evaluator and the use of a multicriteria ordinal regression approach. Specifically, the UTA II method is used, whose interactive application process is divided in two phases. Its implementation is supported by MIIDAS (multicriteria interactive intelligent decision aiding system). This research work aims at supporting potential stakeholders to perform a global e-government evaluation, based on their own viewpoints and preferences. Finally, 21 European countries are evaluated and ranked considering the latest criteria data.     

Risk Decision Making in Operational Safety Management– Experience from the Nordic Benchmark Study

Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT) and Studsvik AB, Sweden, have simulated decision making of the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate and a power company by applying decision models in a benchmark study. Based on the experience from the benchmark study, a decision analysis framework to be used in safety related problems is outlined. By this framework both the power companies and the safety authorities could be provided with a more rigorous, systematic approach in their decision making. A decision analytic approach provides a structure for identifying the information requirements of the problem solving. Thus it could serve as a discussion forum between the authorities and the utilities. In this context, probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) has a crucial role of expressing the plant safety status in terms of reactor core damage accident probability and of risk contributions from various accident precursors. However, a decision under uncertainty should not be based solely on probabilities, particularly when the event in question is a rare one and its probability of occurrence is estimated by means of different kinds of approximations.     

Market segmentation: A multiple criteria approach combining preference analysis and segmentation decision

We propose a new multiple criteria decision aiding approach for market segmentation that integrates preference analysis and segmentation decision within a unified framework. The approach employs an additive value function as the preference model and requires consumers to provide pairwise comparisons of some products as the preference information. To analyze each consumer’s preferences, the approach applies the disaggregation paradigm and the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis to derive a set of value functions according to the preference information provided by each consumer. Then, each consumer’s preferences can be represented by the distribution of possible rankings of products and associated support degrees by applying the derived value functions. On the basis of preference analysis, a new metric is proposed to measure the similarity between preferences of different consumers, and a hierarchical clustering algorithm is developed to perform market segmentation. To help firms serve consumers from different segments with targeted marketing policies and appropriate products, the approach proposes to work out a representative value function and the univocal ranking of products for each consumer so that products that rank in the front of the list can be presented to her/him. Finally, an illustrative example of a market segmentation problem details the application of the proposed approach.     

An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis

Quantitative risk analysis is being extensively employed to support policymakers and provides a strong conceptual framework for evaluating decision alternatives under uncertainty. Many problems involving environmental risks are, however, of a spatial nature, i.e., containing spatial impacts, spatial vulnerabilities, and spatial risk‐mitigation alternatives. Recent developments in multicriteria spatial analysis have enabled the assessment and aggregation of multiple impacts, supporting policymakers in spatial evaluation problems. However, recent attempts to conduct spatial multicriteria risk analysis have generally been weakly conceptualized, without adequate roots in quantitative risk analysis. Moreover, assessments of spatial risk often neglect the multidimensional nature of spatial impacts (e.g., social, economic, human) that are typically occurring in such decision problems. The aim of this article is therefore to suggest a conceptual quantitative framework for environmental multicriteria spatial risk analysis based on expected multi‐attribute utility theory. The framework proposes: (i) the formal assessment of multiple spatial impacts; (ii) the aggregation of these multiple spatial impacts; (iii) the assessment of spatial vulnerabilities and probabilities of occurrence of adverse events; (iv) the computation of spatial risks; (v) the assessment of spatial risk mitigation alternatives; and (vi) the design and comparison of spatial risk mitigation alternatives (e.g., reductions of vulnerabilities and/or impacts). We illustrate the use of the framework in practice with a case study based on a flood‐prone area in northern Italy.     

Decision process of allocating projects to project managers

Allocating projects to project managers (PM) is a crucial decision in project management. Choosing the PM must be undertaken in a structured way, and thereby take into account the needs of the project and the PM’s competences and availability. The proposed model optimises the total time that PMs have available and takes into account the constraint of the switchover time loss within the mathematical programming. It model is part of a three-stage approach where: (1) projects are sorted using a multicriteria approach; (2) PMs are sorted using a multicriteria approach; and (3) the final allocation to intra-classes of projects is made using the optimisation model. This proposal contributes to aiding decision-makers involved in allocating projects: by respecting the limit of the time that PMs have available, or by extrapolating PMs’ available hours in which case overtime will have to be used. The model is applied in a Brazilian Energy Company.     

Ranking the Risks from Multiple Hazards in a Small Community

Natural hazards, human-induced accidents, and malicious acts have caused great losses and disruptions to society. After September 11, 2001, critical infrastructure protection has become a national focus in the United States and is likely to remain one for the foreseeable future. Damage to the infrastructures and assets could be mitigated through predisaster planning and actions. A systematic methodology was developed to assess and rank the risks from these multiple hazards in a community of 20,000 people. It is an interdisciplinary study that includes probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), decision analysis, and expert judgment. Scenarios are constructed to show how the initiating events evolve into undesirable consequences. A value tree, based on multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT), is used to capture the decisionmaker's preferences about the impacts on the infrastructures and other assets. The risks from random failures are ranked according to their expected performance index (PI), which is the product of frequency, probabilities, and consequences of a scenario. Risks from malicious acts are ranked according to their PI as the frequency of attack is not available. A deliberative process is used to capture the factors that could not be addressed in the analysis and to scrutinize the results. This methodology provides a framework for the development of a risk-informed decision strategy. Although this study uses the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus as a case study of a real project, it is a general methodology that could be used by other similar communities and municipalities.     

Chainwise Paired Comparisons

The pairwise comparison technique is a building block of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which has been popularly used for multicriteria decision analysis. This paper develops a shortcut technique in which only n paired comparisons forming a closed chain are needed for n decision elements. Together with the development of a simple and intuitive measure of (inconsistency, this technique derives the relative weights of decision elements via easy step-by-step calculations on a spreadsheet format. Its performance has been tested on Saaty's wealth of nations example. It is important to notice that ranking and weights yielded from this alternative technique are identical to Harker's incomplete pairwise comparison solution for the same chain orientation for the example tested.     

Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making

We focus on a class of multicriteria methods that are commonly used in environmental decision making—those that employ the weighted linear average algorithm (and this includes the popular analytic hierarchy process (AHP)). While we do not doubt the potential benefits of using formal decision methods of this type, we draw attention to the consequences of not using them well. In particular, we highlight a property of these methods that should not be overlooked when they are applied in environmental and wider decision-making contexts: the final decision or ranking of options is dependent on the choice of performance scoring scales for the criteria when the criteria weights are held constant. We compare this "sensitivity" to a well-known criticism of the AHP, and we go on to describe the more general lesson when it comes to using weighted linear average methods—a lesson concerning the relationship between criteria weights and performance scoring scales.     

Tiered Approach to Resilience Assessment

Regulatory agencies have long adopted a three‐tier framework for risk assessment. We build on this structure to propose a tiered approach for resilience assessment that can be integrated into the existing regulatory processes. Comprehensive approaches to assessing resilience at appropriate and operational scales, reconciling analytical complexity as needed with stakeholder needs and resources available, and ultimately creating actionable recommendations to enhance resilience are still lacking. Our proposed framework consists of tiers by which analysts can select resilience assessment and decision support tools to inform associated management actions relative to the scope and urgency of the risk and the capacity of resource managers to improve system resilience. The resilience management framework proposed is not intended to supplant either risk management or the many existing efforts of resilience quantification method development, but instead provide a guide to selecting tools that are appropriate for the given analytic need. The goal of this tiered approach is to intentionally parallel the tiered approach used in regulatory contexts so that resilience assessment might be more easily and quickly integrated into existing structures and with existing policies.     

Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments

Contaminated sediments and other sites present a difficult challenge for environmental decisionmakers. They are typically slow to recover or attenuate naturally, may involve multiple regulatory agencies and stakeholder groups, and engender multiple toxicological and ecotoxicological risks. While environmental decision-making strategies over the last several decades have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches, there remains considerable dissatisfaction among business, industry, and the public with existing management strategies. Consequently, contaminated sediments and materials are the subject of intense technology development, such as beneficial reuse or in situ treatment. However, current decision analysis approaches, such as comparative risk assessment, benefit-cost analysis, and life cycle assessment, do not offer a comprehensive approach for incorporating the varied types of information and multiple stakeholder and public views that must typically be brought to bear when new technologies are under consideration. Alternatively, multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) offers a scientifically sound decision framework for management of contaminated materials or sites where stakeholder participation is of crucial concern and criteria such as economics, environmental impacts, safety, and risk cannot be easily condensed into simple monetary expressions. This article brings together a multidisciplinary review of existing decision-making approaches at regulatory agencies in the United States and Europe and synthesizes state-of-the-art research in MCDA methods applicable to the assessment of contaminated sediment management technologies. Additionally, it tests an MCDA approach for coupling expert judgment and stakeholder values in a hypothetical contaminated sediments management case study wherein MCDA is used as a tool for testing stakeholder responses to and improving expert assessment of innovative contaminated sediments technologies.     

Probability Elicitation Under Severe Time Pressure: A Rank‐Based Method

Probability elicitation protocols are used to assess and incorporate subjective probabilities in risk and decision analysis. While most of these protocols use methods that have focused on the precision of the elicited probabilities, the speed of the elicitation process has often been neglected. However, speed is also important, particularly when experts need to examine a large number of events on a recurrent basis. Furthermore, most existing elicitation methods are numerical in nature, but there are various reasons why an expert would refuse to give such precise ratio‐scale estimates, even if highly numerate. This may occur, for instance, when there is lack of sufficient hard evidence, when assessing very uncertain events (such as emergent threats), or when dealing with politicized topics (such as terrorism or disease outbreaks). In this article, we adopt an ordinal ranking approach from multicriteria decision analysis to provide a fast and nonnumerical probability elicitation process. Probabilities are subsequently approximated from the ranking by an algorithm based on the principle of maximum entropy, a rule compatible with the ordinal information provided by the expert. The method can elicit probabilities for a wide range of different event types, including new ways of eliciting probabilities for stochastically independent events and low‐probability events. We use a Monte Carlo simulation to test the accuracy of the approximated probabilities and try the method in practice, applying it to a real‐world risk analysis recently conducted for DEFRA (the U.K. Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs): the prioritization of animal health threats.     

A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens

We develop a prioritization framework for foodborne risks that considers public health impact as well as three other factors (market impact, consumer risk acceptance and perception, and social sensitivity). Canadian case studies are presented for six pathogen‐food combinations: Campylobacter spp. in chicken; Salmonella spp. in chicken and spinach; Escherichia coli O157 in spinach and beef; and Listeria monocytogenes in ready‐to‐eat meats. Public health impact is measured by disability‐adjusted life years and the cost of illness. Market impact is quantified by the economic importance of the domestic market. Likert‐type scales are used to capture consumer perception and acceptance of risk and social sensitivity to impacts on vulnerable consumer groups and industries. Risk ranking is facilitated through the development of a knowledge database presented in the format of info cards and the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to aggregate the four factors. Three scenarios representing different stakeholders illustrate the use of MCDA to arrive at rankings of pathogen‐food combinations that reflect different criteria weights. The framework provides a flexible instrument to support policymakers in complex risk prioritization decision making when different stakeholder groups are involved and when multiple pathogen‐food combinations are compared.     

Combining Quantitative Risk Assessment of Human Health,Food Waste,and Energy Consumption: The Next Step in the Development of the Food Cold Chain?

The preservation of perishable food via refrigeration in the supply chain is essential to extend shelf life and provide consumers with safe food. However, electricity consumed in refrigeration processes has an economical and an environmental impact. This study focuses on the cold chain of cooked ham, including transport, cold room in supermarket, display cabinet, transport by consumer, and domestic refrigerator, and aims to predict the risk for human health associated with Listeria monocytogenes, the amount of food wasted due to the growth of spoilage bacteria, and the electrical consumption to maintain product temperature through the cold chain. A set of eight intervention actions were tested to evaluate their impact on the three criteria. Results show that the modification of the thermostat of the domestic refrigerator has a high impact on food safety and food waste and a limited impact on the electrical consumption. Inversely, the modification of the airflow rate in the display cabinet has a high impact on electrical consumption and a limited impact on food safety and food waste. A cost–benefit analysis approach and two multicriteria decision analysis methods were used to rank the intervention actions. These three methodologies show that setting the thermostat of the domestic refrigerator to 4 °C presents the best compromise between the three criteria. The impact of decisionmaker preferences (criteria weight) and limitations of these three approaches are discussed. The approaches proposed by this study may be useful in decision making to evaluate global impact of intervention actions in issues involving conflicting outputs.     

A Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk

Accounting for about 290,000–650,000 deaths across the globe, seasonal influenza is estimated by the World Health Organization to be a major cause of mortality. Hence, there is a need for a reliable and robust epidemiological surveillance decision-making system to understand and combat this epidemic disease. In a previous study, the authors proposed a decision support system to fight against seasonal influenza. This system is composed of three subsystems: (i) modeling and simulation, (ii) data warehousing, and (iii) analysis. The analysis subsystem relies on spatial online analytical processing (S-OLAP) technology. Although the S-OLAP technology is useful in analyzing multidimensional spatial data sets, it cannot take into account the inherent multicriteria nature of seasonal influenza risk assessment by itself. Therefore, the objective of this article is to extend the existing decision support system by adding advanced multicriteria analysis capabilities for enhanced seasonal influenza risk assessment and monitoring. Bearing in mind the characteristics of the decision problem considered in this article, a well-known multicriteria classification method, the dominance-based rough set approach (DRSA), was selected to boost the existing decision support system. Combining the S-OLAP technology and the multicriteria classification method DRSA in the same decision support system will largely improve and extend the scope of analysis capabilities. The extended decision support system has been validated by its application to assess seasonal influenza risk in the northwest region of Algeria.     

Multiattribute Risk Analysis in Nuclear Emergency Management

Radiation protection authorities have seen a potential for applying multiattribute risk analysis in nuclear emergency management and planning to deal with conflicting objectives, different parties involved, and uncertainties. This type of approach is expected to help in the following areas: to ensure that all relevant attributes are considered in decision making; to enhance communication between the concerned parties, including the public; and to provide a method for explicitly including risk analysis in the process. A multiattribute utility theory analysis was used to select a strategy for protecting the population after a simulated nuclear accident. The value-focused approach and the use of a neutral facilitator were identified as being useful.     

A Framework for Assessing and Managing Risks Posed by Emerging Diseases

Frameworks for analyzing the risks of emerging diseases and invasive species often have relied on unstructured estimates of likelihoods and consequences. We suggest a flexible alternative that offers more transparent analysis without need for additional data. Its strength lies in explicit and complementary treatment of technical and social judgments. We describe a system in which cognitive maps, Bayes nets, and multicriteria analysis can be used in tandem to structure a problem, identify exposure pathways, combine data and expert judgement to estimate the likelihoods, and assess consequences of alternative decisions. These tools may be employed in participatory settings or as part of standard regulatory practice. We illustrate this approach with an assessment of the management of an emerging disease that poses a hazard to Australia.     

A Hierarchical Product Development Planning Framework

Uncertainty in new product development (NPD) planning embraces market, creative, technological, and process dimensions to a much greater extent than in non‐NPD project planning. Yet, NPD management is becoming increasingly decentralized, both within the firm and across the supply chain. Hence, planning for NPD uncertainty often results in path‐dependent scenarios cutting across the strategic, tactical, and operational levels of planning. To coordinate this resulting complexity, we propose a stochastic hierarchical product development planning framework with multiple recourses, i. e., corrective actions, to maximize performance across a firm's entire NPD program. We also argue the necessity for a fourth planning level, the infrastructural, that reestablishes norms for market projections, technological forecasts, scheduling, and requirements as latent uncertainty in the environment is continually revealed. An illustration from the automotive industry is presented to demonstrate a deployment of our framework. We additionally discuss the applicability of this framework for managing NPD capabilities over time.     

A robustness framework for monitoring real options under uncertainty

This paper presents a problem structuring methodology to assess real option decisions in the face of unpredictability. Based on principles of robustness analysis and scenario planning, we demonstrate how decision-aiding can facilitate participation in projects setting and achieve effective decision making through the use of real options reasoning. We argue that robustness heuristics developed in earlier studies can be practical proxies for real options performance, hence indicators of efficient flexible planning. The developed framework also highlights how to integrate real options solutions in firms’ strategic plans and operating actions. The use of the methodology in a location decision application is provided for illustration.