Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment

Sustainability assessments require the management of a wide variety of information types, parameters and uncertainties. Multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been regarded as a suitable set of methods to perform sustainability evaluations as a result of its flexibility and the possibility of facilitating the dialogue between stakeholders, analysts and scientists. However, it has been reported that researchers do not usually properly define the reasons for choosing a certain MCDA method instead of another. Familiarity and affinity with a certain approach seem to be the drivers for the choice of a certain procedure. This review paper presents the performance of five MCDA methods (i.e. MAUT, AHP, PROMETHEE, ELECTRE and DRSA) in respect to ten crucial criteria that sustainability assessments tools should satisfy, among which are a life cycle perspective, thresholds and uncertainty management, software support and ease of use. The review shows that MAUT and AHP are fairly simple to understand and have good software support, but they are cognitively demanding for the decision makers, and can only embrace a weak sustainability perspective as trade-offs are the norm. Mixed information and uncertainty can be managed by all the methods, while robust results can only be obtained with MAUT. ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and DRSA are non-compensatory approaches which consent to use a strong sustainability concept, accept a variety of thresholds, but suffer from rank reversal. DRSA is less demanding in terms of preference elicitation, is very easy to understand and provides a straightforward set of decision rules expressed in the form of elementary “if … then …” conditions. Dedicated software is available for all the approaches with a medium to wide range of results capability representation. DRSA emerges as the easiest method, followed by AHP, PROMETHEE and MAUT, while ELECTRE is regarded as fairly difficult. Overall, the analysis has shown that most of the requirements are satisfied by the MCDA methods (although to different extents) with the exclusion of management of mixed data types and adoption of life cycle perspective which are covered by all the considered approaches

A framework for the selection of the right nuclear power plant

Civil nuclear reactors are used for the production of electrical energy. In the nuclear industry vendors propose several nuclear reactor designs with a size from 35–45 MWe up to 1600–1700 MWe. The choice of the right design is a multidimensional problem since a utility has to include not only financial factors as levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) and internal rate of return (IRR), but also the so called “external factors” like the required spinning reserve, the impact on local industry and the social acceptability. Therefore it is necessary to balance advantages and disadvantages of each design during the entire life cycle of the plant, usually 40–60 years. In the scientific literature there are several techniques for solving this multidimensional problem. Unfortunately it does not seem possible to apply these methodologies as they are, since the problem is too complex and it is difficult to provide consistent and trustworthy expert judgments. This paper fills the gap, proposing a two-step framework to choosing the best nuclear reactor at the pre-feasibility study phase. The paper shows in detail how to use the methodology, comparing the choice of a small-medium reactor (SMR) with a large reactor (LR), characterised, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (2006), by an electrical output respectively lower and higher than 700 MWe

Public initiatives of settlement transformation. A theoretical-methodological approach to selecting tools of multi-criteria decision analysis

In Europe, the operating context in which initiatives of settlement transformation are currently initiated is characterized by a complex, elaborate combination of technical, regulatory and governance-related factors. A similar set of considerations makes it necessary to address the complex decision-making problems to be resolved through multidisciplinary, comparative approaches designed to rationalize the process and treat the elements to be considered in systematic fashion with respect to the range of alternatives available as solutions. Within a context defined in this manner, decision-making processes must often be used to obtain multidisciplinary and multidimensional analyses to support the choices made by the decision-makers. Such analyses are carried out using multi-criteria tools designed to arrive at syntheses of the numerous forms of input data needed to describe decision-making problems of similar complexity, so that one or more outcomes of the synthesis make possible informed, well thought-out, strategic decisions. The technical literature on the topic proposes numerous tools of multi-criteria analysis for application in different decision-making contexts. Still, no specific contributions have been drawn up to date on the approach to take in selecting the tool best suited to providing adequate responses to the queries of evaluation that arise most frequently in the various fields of application, and especially in the settlement sector. The objective of this paper is to propose, by formulating a taxonomy of the endogenous and exogenous variables of tools of multi-criteria analysis, a methodology capable of selecting the tool best suited to the queries of evaluation which arise regarding the chief categories of decision-making problems, and particularly in the settlement sector

A multicriteria analysis of stated preferences among freight transport alternatives

Stated preferences data can be of different types: choice data, rankings or ratings. In all cases, these data can be used in different ways as inputs of econometric discrete choice models. This allows to estimate the weights of the different attributes characterizing an alternative. For freight transport, an alternative's attributes would be, for example, reliability, safety, frequency, etc., besides time and cost. Depending on the data sample, number of alternatives and number of attributes, it is possible to proceed to an analysis of individual data or of aggregated data. In case one is interested to analyze individual behaviors in depth, the option exists to rely on some kind of multicriteria analysis for deriving individual utility functions (actually, decision functions) rather than on a classic discrete choice model. Such a procedure also can be useful for deriving individual utilities as input in a hybrid model combining individual utilities with group data. Such a multicriteria approach is envisaged in the context of a stated preference experiment that is currently applied to freight shippers in Belgium. The data in this case are rankings of alternatives, and there is multicritera method that is particularly well adapted for such data: the UTA models developed by Jacquet-Lagrèze and Siskos. It is based on the specification of an additive utility made of non-linear partial utility functions that are piecewise linear. This allows the convenient set-up of a linear goal programming problem which estimates all the functions and their weights. The paper intends to present the ranking experiment, and to use some of the preliminary interviews to illustrate this UTA methodology. Also, it will be shown how it can be used to derive equivalent money values for each attributes on the basis of the cost attribute, and how to distinguish valuations in terms of willingness to pay and willingness to accept a compensation.

Decision support model for the selection of asphalt wearing courses in highly trafficked roads

The suitable choice of the materials forming the wearing course of highly trafficked roads is a delicate task because of their direct interaction with vehicles. Furthermore, modern roads must be planned according to sustainable development goals, which is complex because some of these might be in conflict. Under this premise, this paper develops a multi-criteria decision support model based on the analytic hierarchy process and the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution to facilitate the selection of wearing courses in European countries. Variables were modelled using either fuzzy logic or Monte Carlo methods, depending on their nature. The views of a panel of experts on the problem were collected and processed using the generalized reduced gradient algorithm and a distance-based aggregation approach. The results showed a clear preponderance by stone mastic asphalt over the remaining alternatives in different scenarios evaluated through sensitivity analysis. The research leading to these results was framed in the European FP7 Project DURABROADS (No. 605404).The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under Grant Agreement No. 605404

Choice Experiments in Enviromental Impact Assessment: The Toro 3 Hydroelectric Project and the Recreo Verde Tourist Center in Costa Rica

Choice experiments, a stated preference valuation method, are proposed as a tool to assign monetary values to environmental externalities during the ex-ante stages of environmental impact assessment. This case study looks at the impacts of the Costa Rican Institute of Electricity’s Toro 3 hydroelectric project and its affects on the Recreo Verde tourism center in San Carlos, Costa Rica. Compared to other valuation methods (e.g., travel cost and contingent valuation), choice experiments can create hypothetical but realistic scenarios for consumers and generate restoration alternatives for the affected good. Although they have limitations that must be taken into account in environmental impact assessments, incorporating economic parameters—especially resource constraints and tradeoffs—can substantially enrich the assessment process.stated-preference, economic valuation, choice experiments, hydropower, tourism, Costa Rica

Analyzing policy capturing data using structural equation modeling for within-subject experiments (SEMWISE)

We present the SEMWISE (structural equation modeling for within-subject experiments) approach for analyzing policy capturing data. Policy capturing entails estimating the weights (or utilities) of experimentally manipulated attributes in predicting a response variable of interest (e.g., the effect of experimentally manipulated market-technology combination characteristics on perceived entrepreneurial opportunity). In the SEMWISE approach, a factor model is specified in which latent weight factors capture individually varying effects of experimentally manipulated attributes on the response variable. We describe the core SEMWISE model and propose several extensions (how to incorporate nonbinary attributes and interactions, model multiple indicators of the response variable, relate the latent weight factors to antecedents and/or consequences, and simultaneously investigate several populations of respondents). The primary advantage of the SEMWISE approach is that it facilitates the integration of individually varying policy capturing weights into a broader nomological network while accounting for measurement error. We illustrate the approach with two empirical examples, compare and contrast the SEMWISE approach with multilevel modeling (MLM), discuss how researchers can choose between SEMWISE and MLM, and provide implementation guidelines