期刊
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 245, 期 3, 页码 837-850出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.005
关键词
Multiple criteria analysis; Group decisions and negotiations; Decision Support Systems; ELECTRE methods; Interaction between criteria
In this article we compare five alternative projects for the requalification of an abandoned quarry. The starting point for this paper was a request made by a decision maker. It was not for help in making a decision as such, but rather for a comparison of different projects. In particular, we are interested in ranking the considered projects on the basis of six different criteria. An extension of the ELECTRE III method with interactions between pairs of criteria was applied in the research. A focus group of experts (in economic evaluation, environmental engineering, and landscape ecology) was formed to be in charge of the process leading to the assignment of numerical values to the weights and interaction coefficients. We report on the way the process evolved and on the difficulties we encountered in obtaining consensual sets of values. Taking into account these difficulties, we considered other sets of weights and interaction coefficients. Our aim was also to study the impact on the final ranking of the fact that these numerical values, assigned to the parameters, were not perfectly defined. This allowed us to formulate robust conclusions which were presented to the members of the focus group. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. and Association of European Operational Research Societies (EURO) within the International Federation of Operational Research Societies (IFORS). All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据