Interactive Utility Assessment in Multicriteria Decision Analysis Using Implicit Trade-off Information

1988 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodor J. Stewart
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2 esp.) ◽  
pp. 82-96
Author(s):  
Guilherme Marcelo Zanghelini ◽  
Edivan Cherubini ◽  
Henrique Rogerio Antunes de Souza Junior ◽  
Sebastião Roberto Soares

A ponderação é um tópico controverso na comunidade de Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) por conta da subjetividade que acompanha todo o processo de atribuição de significância para as categorias de impacto. Por outro lado, simplifica a interpretação e comunicação de resultados, frequentemente multidimensionais e com trade-off entre indicadores. Quando baseada no painel de especialistas, a ponderação é influenciada pelo julgamento de valor de cada indivíduo, de forma que cada grupo de stakeholders pode influenciar nos resultados. Neste contexto, a utilização da Análise de Decisão Multicritério (MCDA) no campo da ACV permite estruturar problemas complexos, incluir de forma ordenada o julgamento dos multistakeholders e preencher a lacuna da ponderação para o contexto brasileiro. O objetivo deste artigo foi quantificar a significância das categorias de impacto ambiental segundo os stakeholders nacionais. A metodologia embasou-se na aplicação de dois painéis de especialistas estruturados no modelo híbrido de MCDA AHP/PROMETHEE II, com valores calculados segundo algoritmo de agregação do PROMETHEE II. O primeiro painel ponderou 8 critérios relacionados às categorias de impacto segundo especialistas da ACV. O segundo painel elicitou os pesos para 8 categorias de impacto em nível midpoint de acordo com os critérios estabelecidos no primeiro painel segundo a Academia, Governo e Indústria. O julgamento médio dos 76 participantes atribuiu maior significância para Mudanças Climáticas (18,5%), seguido pela Depleção da Camada de Ozônio (15,5%) enquanto que outras 6 categorias completam os 100% do conjunto de pesos.  Palavras-chave: Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida. Categoria de Impacto. Ponderação. Análise de Decisão Multicritério. Stakeholders.ResumenLa ponderación es un tema controvertido en la comunidad de Análisis del Ciclo de Vida (ACV) por la subjetividad que acompaña todo el proceso de atribución de significancia para las categorías de impacto. Por otro lado, simplifica la interpretación y comunicación de resultados, a menudo multidimensionales y con compensación entre indicadores. Cuando se basa en el panel de expertos, la ponderación es influenciada por el juicio de valor de cada individuo, de forma que cada grupo de stakeholders puede influir en los resultados. En este contexto, la utilización del Análisis de Decisión Multicriterio (MCDA) en el campo de la ACV permite estructurar problemas complejos, incluir de forma ordenada el juicio de los multistakeholders y llenar la brecha de la ponderación para el contexto brasileño. El objetivo de este trabajo fue cuantificar la significancia de las categorías de impacto ambiental según los stakeholders nacionales. La metodología se basó en la aplicación de dos paneles de especialistas estructurados en el modelo híbrido de MCDA AHP/PROMETHEE II, con valores calculados según algoritmo de agregación del PROMETHEE II. El primer panel ponderó 8 criterios relacionados con las categorías de impacto según expertos de la ACV. De acuerdo con los criterios establecidos en el primer panel el segundo panel elicitó los pesos para 8 categorías de impacto a nivel midpoint según la Academia, Gobierno e Industria. El juicio promedio de los 76 participantes atribuyó mayor significancia para el Cambio Climático (18,5%), seguido por la Depleción de la Capa de Ozono (15,5%) mientras que otras 6 categorías completan el 100% del conjunto de pesos.  Palabras clave: Análisis del Ciclo de Vida. Categoría de Impacto. Ponderación. Análisis de Decisión Multicriterio. Stakeholders.AbstractThe weighting step is a controversial topic in the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) community due to the subjectivity of the entire process of assigning significance to impact categories. On the other hand, it simplifies the interpretation and communication of results. The results in LCA are often multidimensional and with trade-off between indicators. When based on the panel of experts, the weighting is influenced by the judgment of each individual value, therefore each group of stakeholders can influence the results. In this context, the use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in the LCA allows to structure complex problems, to set an orderly way the judgment from multistakeholders and fill the gap of the weighting for the Brazilian context. The objective of this paper was to quantify the significance of environmental impact categories according to national stakeholders. The methodology was based on the application of two expert panels structured in the hybrid model of MCDA AHP/PROMETHEE II, with values calculated according to the aggregation algorithm of PROMETHEE II. The first panel considered 8 criteria related to impact categories according to LCA experts. Based on the criteria established in the first panel the second panel elicited the weights for 8 impact categories at the midpoint level according to Academy, Government and Industry representatives. The average judgment of the 76 participants attributed greater significance to Climate Change (18.5%), followed by Ozone Layer Depletion (15.5%) while other 6 categories complete 100% of the set of weights.  Keywords: Life Cycle Assessment. Impact Category. Weighting. Multicriteria Decision Analysis. Stakeholders.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1791-1804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Gavrilescu ◽  
Elena-Diana Comanita ◽  
Petronela Cozma ◽  
Isabela Maria Simion ◽  
Mihaela Rosca

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110190
Author(s):  
Ilyas Khan ◽  
Liliane Pintelon ◽  
Harry Martin

Objectives The main objectives of this article are 2-fold. First, we explore the application of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods in different areas of health care, particularly the adoption of various MCDA methods across health care decision making problems. Second, we report on the publication trends on the application of MCDA methods in health care. Method PubMed was searched for literature from 1960 to 2019 in the English language. A wide range of keywords was used to retrieve relevant studies. The literature search was performed in September 2019. Articles were included only if they have reported an MCDA case in health care. Results and Conclusion The search yielded 8,318 abstracts, of which 158 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were considered for further analysis. Hybrid methods are the most widely used methods in health care decision making problems. When it comes to single methods, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is the most widely used method followed by TOPSIS (technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution), multiattribute utility theory, goal programming, EVIDEM (evidence and value: impact on decision making), evidential reasoning, discrete choice experiment, and so on. Interestingly, the usage of hybrid methods has been high in recent years. AHP is most widely applied in screening and diagnosing and followed by treatment, medical devices, resource allocation, and so on. Furthermore, treatment, screening and diagnosing, medical devices, and drug development and assessment got more attention in the MCDA context. It is indicated that the application of MCDA methods to health care decision making problem is determined by the nature and complexity of the health care problem. However, guidelines and tools exist that assist in the selection of an MCDA method.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document