Decision-making methods in engineering design: a designer-oriented approach

The use of decisional methods for the solution of engineering design problems has to be tackled on a "human" viewpoint. Hence, fundamental is the identification of design issues and needs that become a designer oriented viewpoint. Decision-based methods are systematically classified in MCDM methods, Structured Design methods and Problem Structuring methods. The results are organised in order to provide a first reference for the designer in a preliminary selection of decision-based methods. The paper shows the heterogeneous use of decision-based methods, traditionally expected to solve only some specific design problems, which have been used also in different design contexts. Moreover, several design issues, which emerged from the review process, have been pointed out and discussed accordingly. This review provided useful results for the enlargement of the state of the art on Decision Based Design methods in engineering design contexts

Decision-making: a laboratory-based case study in conceptual design

The engineering design process may be seen as a series of interrelated operations that are driven by decisions: each operation is carried out as the consequence of an associated decision. Hence, an effective design process relies heavily upon effective decision-making. As a consequence, supporting decision-making may be a significant means for achieving design process improvements. This thesis concentrates on how to support selection-type decision-making in conceptual engineering design. [Continues.

Evaluation of group decision making based on group preferences under a multi-criteria environment

Arrow’s impossibility theorem stated that no single group decision making (GDM) method is perfect, in other words, different GDM methods can produce different or even conflicting rankings. So, 1) how to evaluate GDM methods and 2) how to reconcile different or even conflicting rankings are two important and difficult problems in GDM process, which have not been fully studied. This paper aims to develop and propose a group decision-making consensus recognition model, named GDMCRM, to address these two problems in the evaluation of GDM methods under a multi-criteria environment in order to identify and achieve optimal group consensus. In this model, the ordinal and cardinal GDM methods are both implemented and studied in the process of evaluating the GDM methods. What’s more, this proposed model can reconcile different or even conflicting rankings generated by the eight GDM methods, based on empirical research on two real-life datasets: financial data of 12 urban commercial banks and annual report data of seven listed oil companies. The results indicate the proposed model not only can largely satisfy the group preferences of multiple stakeholders, but can also identify the best compromise solution from the opinion of all the participants involved in the group decision process. First published online 20 October 202

Battery storage systems as balancing option in intermittent renewable energy systems - A transdisciplinary approach under the frame of Constructive Technology Assessment

Different battery storage technologies are considered as important flexibility option in the face of increasing shares of renewables in the grid. A challenge is to support decision-making by providing a broader perspective on battery technology development, choice, and implementation. The tailored approach in the frame of Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) in combination with system analysis allows it to explore actor visions and expectations about battery storage and to use this information to provide quantitative information about the consequences of these. Research results combine the perspectives of technology and non-technology related actors (enactors and selectors) to create new and broader knowledge to provide “better” technology. Major implications identified for battery storage are missing business models, uncertain regulations, and doubts about their techno-economic viability. A highlight is a proof that expectations about technology characteristics in orientation to sustainability criteria are settled within concentric perspectives by using the Analytic-Hierarchy-Process (AHP). Enactors focus on economic and technological criteria which reflect the concentric bias of this group. In contrast, selectors perceive environmental and social criteria as more important. The consensus among actors regarding criteria importance is not existent to moderate which indicates that more research is required here. System analysis is used to quantify actor preferences obtained through the AHP. Li-Ion-batteries (LIB), lead-acid-batteries (VRLA), high-temperature-batteries (NaNiCl and NaS), and Vanadium-redox-flowbatteries (VRFB) are evaluated through e.g. life cycle assessment and costing for four different application fields (decentralized storage, wind energy support, primary regulation and energy-time-shift (ETS-includes compressed-air-energy-storage (CAES) and pumped-hydro-storage (PHS)). Preliminary rankings indicate that most LIBs can be recommended for all application areas, wherein decentralized storage is considered to offer the highest potentials for battery storage. VRLA and NaS achieve rather low scores whereas ranking of VRFB is highly dependent on the considered use case. PHS and CAES dominate all assessed energy storage technologies in the ETS application case

A systematic review on MIVES: a sustainability-oriented multi-criteria decision-making method

Sustainability has practically become a mandatory concept to be considered in every decision, and multiple decision-making methods have been adapted to take it into account. Among them, sustainability centred methods are also known as sustainability assessments, which provides sustainability indexes to select and prioritize alternatives. One of these most recent presented techniques is MIVES, a multi attribute utility theory multi-criteria decision-making value function-based method initially developed to introduce environmental and social indicators in civil engineering design decisions and later adapted for general evaluation and prioritization of homogenous and heterogeneous alternatives. Over the last decade, it has been widely studied and applied to specific situations, but a MIVES summary is currently lacking. Therefore, in this paper MIVES literature is reviewed with a deep bibliometric analysis carried out to provide on multiple data about MIVES state-of-the-art. Furthermore, a thematic clusters categorisation is done to reveal the usefulness of MIVES as design and decision-making tool, cataloguing the wide applications of MIVES as sustainability index. Finally, a MIVES characteristics discussion is carried out to help researchers deepen their knowledge towards the method and highlight potential future research pathways.The first author acknowledges the Goverment of Spain: Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports [grant number FPU18/01471]. The second and last author wishes to recognize the support from Serra Hunter programme. Finally, this work was supported by Catalan agency AGAUR trough their research groups support program (2017SGR00227). This research is part of the R&D project IAQ4EDU, reference no. PID2020-117366RB-I00, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Assessing the applicability of participatory multi-criteria analysis (MCA) methodologies to the appraisal of mega transport infrastructure

The topic of ‘how mega transport projects should be assessed’ continues to generate disputes amongst academics, infrastructure specialists, investors and governments alike. This Ph.D. research sought to explore the applicability and effectiveness of participatory MCA methodologies to the (economic, environmental and social) appraisal of such projects. Although very popular amongst academics, participatory MCA methodologies seem to have enjoyed limited practical application and there are no studies assessing their effectiveness. This research entailed several steps, where different methods of investigation and multiple sources of information, both primary and secondary, were combined together in an effort to increase the reliability of the results. Firstly, a comprehensive review of the literature, whose findings were validated and integrated by means of an expert focus group interview, was undertaken in the attempt to determine the key features of mega transport projects. An investigation into transport appraisal practice and traditional appraisal methodologies was then carried out through a comprehensive analysis of the existing literature, complemented with unstructured interviews and informal discussions with some international experts. Successively, an examination of over 60 publications on participatory MCA methodologies was performed with the objective of determining the main attributes and critical aspects of such methods. An analysis of the current trends in mega transport infrastructure planning and decision-making practice was also undertaken based on a series of interviews with several infrastructure practitioners and the analysis of three large-scale port and port-related projects, namely the Alameda freight rail corridor (US), the expansion of the Port of Rotterdam (Holland) and the London Gateway port complex (UK). The London Gateway port complex was also adopted as case study for a practical application of participatory MCA methodologies. Overall, the outcomes of this multi-actor multi-criteria appraisal exercise, together with the findings from the previous steps of research, led to the identification of several (methodological and non-methodological) issues potentially surrounding the practical application of such methods. These issues were ultimately explored through a survey questionnaire carried out amongst specialists and proponents of participatory techniques. The overall conclusion of the thesis is that participatory MCA methodologies represent an under researched area, where some critical themes have received limited consideration; contrasting views still exist on many fundamental aspects; and where, in many cases, the disconnection between theory and practice is apparent. In particular, the key principles, steps and structure of such methods are (directly or indirectly) based on the rationalcomprehensive planning model, which hardly reflects the way projects are developed. Therefore, while, in principle, multi-actor multi-criteria procedures might be carried out to complement and integrate the information derived from conventional ex-ante analyses, it is difficult to see how such methods could significantly improve the decision-making process of major transport infrastru

A Strong Sustainability Paradigm Based Analytical Hierarchy Process (SSP-AHP) Method to Evaluate Sustainable Healthcare Systems

The recent studies signify the growing concern of researchers towards monitoring and measuring sustainability performance at various levels and in many fields, including healthcare. However, there is no agreed approach to assessing the sustainability of health systems. Moreover, social indicators are less developed and less succinct. Therefore, the authors seek to map sustainable reference values in healthcare and propose a conceptual and structured framework that can guide the measurement of the social sustainability-oriented health systems. Based on a new multi-criteria method called Strong Sustainability Paradigm based Analytical Hierarchy Process, (SSP-AHP), the presented approach opens the availability for systems' comparison and benchmarking. The Strong Sustainability Paradigm incorporated into the multi-criteria evaluation method prevents the exchangeability of criteria by promoting alternatives that achieve good performance values on all criteria, implying sustainability. The research results offer insights into the core domains, sub-domains, and indicators supporting a more comprehensive assessment of the social sustainability of health systems. The framework constructed in this study consists of five major areas: equity, quality, responsiveness, financial coverage, and adaptability. The proposed set of indicators can also serve as a reference instrument, providing transparency about core aspects of performance to be measured and reported, as well as supporting policy-makers in decisions regarding sectoral strategies in healthcare. Our findings suggest that the most socially sustainable systems are Nordic countries. They offer a high level of social and financial protection, achieving very good health outcomes. On the other hand, the most unsustainable systems located in central and eastern European countries.Comment: 34 pages, 13 figures, 16 table

Deliberation, Representation, Equity

"What can we learn about the development of public interaction in e-democracy from a drama delivered by mobile headphones to an audience standing around a shopping center in a Stockholm suburb? In democratic societies there is widespread acknowledgment of the need to incorporate citizens’ input in decision-making processes in more or less structured ways. But participatory decision making is balancing on the borders of inclusion, structure, precision and accuracy. To simply enable more participation will not yield enhanced democracy, and there is a clear need for more elaborated elicitation and decision analytical tools. This rigorous and thought-provoking volume draws on a stimulating variety of international case studies, from flood risk management in the Red River Delta of Vietnam, to the consideration of alternatives to gold mining in Roșia Montană in Transylvania, to the application of multi-criteria decision analysis in evaluating the impact of e-learning opportunities at Uganda's Makerere University. Editors Love Ekenberg (senior research scholar, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis [IIASA], Laxenburg, professor of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University), Karin Hansson (artist and research fellow, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University), Mats Danielson (vice president and professor of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, affiliate researcher, IIASA) and Göran Cars (professor of Societal Planning and Environment, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm) draw innovative collaborations between mathematics, social science, and the arts. They develop new problem formulations and solutions, with the aim of carrying decisions from agenda setting and problem awareness through to feasible courses of action by setting objectives, alternative generation, consequence assessments, and trade-off clarifications. As a result, this book is important new reading for decision makers in government, public administration and urban planning, as well as students and researchers in the fields of participatory democracy, urban planning, social policy, communication design, participatory art, decision theory, risk analysis and computer and systems sciences.

Actors' Engagement in Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms for Responsible Research and Innovation: an Explorative Study of the AHP Technique

Tesis por compendio[ES] La capacidad del ser humano de modificar las condiciones de vida en el planeta se ha incrementado de forma notable en el último siglo. Así, dos fenómenos aparentemente opuestos concurren respecto al potencial destructivo y constructivo de nuestras sociedades. Por un lado, la humanidad se enfrenta al reto de articular procesos que permitan gestionar con responsabilidad los productos resultantes del desarrollo de la ciencia e innovación y evitar el colapso social, económico y medioambiental que puede resultar de los mismos. Por otro lado, la humanidad mira a las ciencias y al potencial innovador para responder a los retos globales que requieren abordajes y coordinación entre diferentes niveles de acción y desde una perspectiva inter y transdisciplinar. En este marco, surge el término "Investigación e Innovación Responsable" (RRI por sus siglas en inglés) con el objetivo de integrar aspectos éticos y demandas de participación de diferentes actores en los procesos de investigación e innovación con el fin de que los productos resultantes de los mismos estén alineados con las expectativas de la sociedad. Bajo el paraguas del término RRI o Responsible Innovation (RI), se han articulado una serie de propuestas teóricas y esfuerzos empíricos para operacionalizar la necesidad de integrar una perspectiva ética y promover la participación de nuevos actores en los procesos de investigación e innovación que permitan modular el potencial constructivo y destructivo de los resultados de la ciencia y la innovación. Para la consolidación del interés por el término RRI ha sido determinante la inclusión del mismo en los programas de investigación de la Comisión Europea. El programa Horizonte 2020 impulsó el uso del término en Europa, destinando fondos de investigación para promover su operativización, desarrollo de herramientas para su fomento, así como de herramientas de evaluación y monitorización. En este trabajo exploraremos los procesos de diseño de herramientas de monitorización y evaluación de la RRI. Para ello, propondremos la ética cívica como teoría que se ajusta a la fundamentación filosófica del concepto RRI, revisaremos cómo se han incorporado los valores y expectativas de agentes ajenos al proceso científico e innovador en el desarrollo de herramientas de monitorización y evaluación de la RRI y exploraremos cómo la técnica AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) puede contribuir a los procesos de desarrollo de dichas herramientas alineando los mismos a los requerimientos de la ética cívica. El trabajo parte de la hipótesis de que los procesos de desarrollo de metodologías y herramientas para la evaluación y monitorización de la RRI pueden ser considerados como procesos de investigación e innovación en sí mismos. En consecuencia, este trabajo analizará los procesos de investigación e innovación hacia herramientas de evaluación y seguimiento de la RRI bajo la óptica propia de la RRI. Se centrará especialmente en explorar el papel de los actores en tales procesos de investigación e innovación y en la potencialidad de la técnica AHP para facilitar la integración de actores en los procesos de desarrollo de herramientas de evaluación y monitorización de la RRI.[CAT] La capacitat de l'ésser humà de modificar les condicions de vida en el planeta ha incrementat de manera notable en l'últim segle. Així, dos fenòmens aparentment oposats concorren respecte al potencial destructiu i constructiu de les nostres societats. D'una banda, la humanitat s'enfronta al repte d'articular processos que permeten gestionar amb responsabilitat els productes resultants del desenvolupament de la ciència i innovació i evitar el col·lapse social, econòmic i mediambiental que pot resultar d'aquests. D'altra banda, la humanitat mira a les ciències i al potencial innovador per a respondre als reptes globals que requereixen abordatges i coordinació entre diferents nivells d'acció i des d'una perspectiva inter i transdisciplinar. En aquest marc, sorgeix el terme "Investigació i Innovació Responsable" (RRI per les seues sigles en anglés) amb l'objectiu d'integrar aspectes ètics i demandes de participació de diferents actors en els processos d'investigació i innovació amb la finalitat que els productes resultants dels mateixos estiguen alineats amb les expectatives de la societat. Sota el paraigua del terme RRI o Responsible Innovation (RI), s'han articulat una sèrie de propostes teòriques i esforços empírics per a operacionalizar la necessitat d'integrar una perspectiva ètica i promoure la participació de nous actors en els processos d'investigació i innovació que permeten modula el potencial constructiu i destructiu dels resultats de la ciència i innovació. Per a la consolidació de l'interés pel terme RRI ha sigut determinant la inclusió del mateix en els programes d'investigació de la Comissió Europea. El programa Horitzó 2020 impulsà l'ús del terme a Europa, destinant fons d'investigació per a promoure la seua operativizació, desenvolupament d'eines per al seu foment, així com d'eines d'avaluació i monitoratge. En aquest treball explorarem els processos de disseny d'eines de monitoratge i avaluació de la RRI. Per a això, proposarem l'ètica cívica com a teoria que s'ajusta a la fonamentació filosòfica del concepte RRI, revisarem com s'ha incorporat els valors i expectatives d'agents aliens al procés científic i innovador en el desenvolupament d'eines de monitoratge i avaluació de la RRI i explorarem com la tècnica AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) pot contribuir als processos de desenvolupament d'aquestes eines alineant els mateixos als requeriments de l'ètica cívica. El treball parteix de la hipòtesi que els processos de desenvolupament de metodologies i eines per a l'avaluació i monitoratge de la RRI poden ser considerats com a processos d'investigació i innovació en si mateixos. En conseqüència, aquest treball analitzarà els processos d'investigació i innovació cap a eines d'avaluació i seguiment de la RRI sota l'òptica pròpia de la RRI. Se centrarà especialment a explorar el paper dels actors en tals processos d'investigació i innovació i en la potencialitat de la tècnica AHP per a facilitar la integració d'actors en els processos de desenvolupament d'eines d'avaluació i monitoratge de la RRI.[EN] The capacity of humanity to modify the conditions of life on the planet has increased dramatically in the last century. Thus, two opposing phenomena concur concerning our societies' destructive and constructive potential. On the one hand, humanity faces the challenge of articulating processes to responsibly manage the products resulting from the development of science and innovation and to avoid the social, economic and environmental collapse that can result from them. On the other hand, humanity looks to the sciences and innovative potential to respond to global challenges that require approaches and coordination between different levels of action and from an inter- and transdisciplinary perspective. In this framework, the term "Responsible Research and Innovation" (RRI) arises intending to integrate ethical aspects and demands for the participation of different actors in research and innovation processes so that the resulting products are aligned with society's expectations. Under the umbrella of the term RRI or Responsible Innovation (RI), a series of theoretical proposals and practical efforts have been articulated to operationalise the need to integrate an ethical perspective and promote the participation of new actors in research and innovation processes to modulate the constructive and destructive potential of the results of science and innovation. Including the term RRI in the European Commission's research programmes has been decisive in consolidating interest in RRI. The Horizon 2020 programme has boosted its use in Europe, allocating research funds for its operationalisation, promotion, evaluation and monitoring tools. In this work, we will explore the design processes of RRI monitoring and evaluation tools. To do so, we will propose civic ethics as a theory that fits the philosophical foundation of the RRI concept, we will review how the values and expectations of agents outside the scientific and innovative process have been incorporated into the development of RRI monitoring and evaluation tools, and we will explore how the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) technique can contribute to the development processes of these tools by aligning them with the requirements of civic ethics. The work stems from the hypothesis that developing methodologies and tools for RRI assessment and monitoring can be considered research and innovation processes. Consequently, this paper will analyse the processes of research and innovation towards RRI assessment and monitoring tools through the lens of RRI. It will primarily focus on exploring the role of actors in such research and innovation processes and on the potential of the AHP technique to facilitate the integration of actors in developing RRI assessment and monitoring tools.Esta tesis ha recibido financiación del Plan Nacional de Investigación del proyecto “Propuesta de indicadores para impulsar el diseño de una política orientada al desarrollo de Investigación e Innovación Responsable en España” (INPERRI) (ref.: CSO2016-76828-R). La concesión del proyecto de investigación permitió también mi contratación como investigadora predoctoral (ref.: BES-2017-081141).Monsonís Payá, I. (2023). Actors' Engagement in Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms for Responsible Research and Innovation: an Explorative Study of the AHP Technique [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/196095Compendi