Upload
dugan
View
22
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
“Social” Multicriteria Evaluation: Methodological Foundations and Operational Consequences. Giuseppe Munda Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona Dept. of Economics and Economic History Ed. B 08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona) Spain e_mail: [email protected]. Structure of the talk. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
“Social” Multicriteria Evaluation: Methodological
Foundations and Operational Consequences
Giuseppe MundaUniversitat Autonoma de Barcelona
Dept. of Economics and Economic HistoryEd. B
08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona)Spain
e_mail: [email protected]
Structure of the talk
•Why Social Multicriteria Evaluation (SMCE)?
•How such an approach should be developed?
•Conclusions
Complexity is an inherent property
of natural and social systems
addressed
ignored
COMPLEXITY
COMPLEX SYSTEMS
CANNOT BE CAPTURED
BY A SINGLE
DIMENTION/PERSPECTIVE
Complexity: the ontological dimension
the existence of different levels and scales at which a hierarchical system can be analyzed implies the unavoidable existence of non-equivalent descriptions of it
a. b.
c. d.
Orientation of the coastal line of Maine
Complexity: the epistemological dimension
EMERGENT COMPLEXITY
Different dimensions
Different values and perspectives
hard and topologies soft
"The issue is not whether it is only the marketplace
that can determine value, for economists have long
debated other means of valuation; our concern is with the assumption
that in any dialogue, all valuations or "numeraires"
should be reducible to a single one-dimension standard".
(Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994, p. 198)
AcademicScience
ProfessionalConsultancy
Post NormalScience
Post NormalScience
Uncertainty
DecisionStakes
facts are uncertainvalues in disputestakes highdecisions urgent
facts are uncertainvalues in disputestakes highdecisions urgent
S. Funtowicz, J. Ravetz
Strong comparability
Weak commensurability
Strong commensurability
Weak comparability
incommensurability
•TECHNICAL INCOMMENSURABILITY
•SOCIAL INCOMMENSURABILITY
NAIADE 2 matrices
Multi-, inter-, trans-disciplinarity?
• Multi-: each expert takes his part
• Inter-: methodological choices are discussed across the disciplines– Informing the others about object matter
– Criticism, reflexivity
• Trans-: What is it? ....
MEASURES FOR DEMAND REDUCTION
Metereological drought
Water demands
Socio-economic system
Water supply system
Natural water bodies
Hydrological drought
Water shortage
Economical losses and intangible impacts
MEASURES FOR SUPPLY INCREASE OR DEFICIT RISK REDUCTION
MEASURES FOR DROUGHT IMPACT REDUCTION
Consequences: 1) MULTIDISCIPLINARITY
ROSAMARINA SCANZANO POMAPIANA DEGLI ALBANESI
Demand Zone
Reservoir
Well
Spring Pump Station
Waste Water TreatmentPlant
CT
ME
SR
RG
EN
CLAG
PATP
030'
38
0
0
0
2040
6080
100
km
PALERMO
Western Palermo
Diversion Supply conduit
Purification Plant
MunicipalitiesMunicipalities
Eastern Palermo
Hydropower Plant
RISALAIMI GABRIELE
SCILLATO
Palermo
Irrigation DistrictACQUA DEI Irrigation DistrictPartinico
MONTE TESORO
Rosamarina
RISALAIMI GABRIELE
CICALA
Infiltration Gallery
PRESIDIANA
Irrigation District
Termini
CariniIndustrial District
S.Leonardo R. Eleuterio R. Belice R.Iato R.
Industrial District
Termini
Irrigation DistrictScillato
CORSARI
S.CATERINA
Trabia Aquifer Palermo Aquifer
Municipality
Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir
IMERA
MunicipalityMisilmeri
Consequence: 2) PARTICIPATIVE TECHNIQUES
• In-Depth Interviews
• Focus Groups
• Questionnaires
• Institutional Analysis
Application of a MulticriteriaAggregation Procedure
Application of an specific ConflictAnalysis Procedure
Construction of an Actors’ Impact Matrix
Construction of aCriterion Impact Matrix
Choice of set ofEvaluation Criteria
Generation ofAlternative Options
Identificationof the Main Actors
Formulation of the ExplanationHypothesis
Inte
rpre
tati
on o
f t
he
Res
ult
s
InstitutionalAnalysis
MC
DA
VALSE: Structure of the Troina Case Study
Objectives and Methodology of DIAFANIS
1. Why a conflict exists?
2. Which alternatives exist?
3. Which system dimensions can be affected?
4. How alternatives can be evaluated?
5. What means transparency?
Step 1: Evaluation of alternatives
1. Alternatives Generation
Historicalanalysis A1 A2 An
Alternatives
CitizenParticipa
tionInstitution.analysis
Step 2: Diffusion of results
1. Existence of multiple values
2. School visits
3. Citizens meetings 4. International Symposium
Technical andSocial Rankings
3. MCE Algorithm CriteriaSelection
Alternatives Evaluation
CitizenParticipation Mixed Information
Data Collection and Participation
Economical SocialEnvironmental
2. Information Structuring
System Dimensions and Hierarchical Scales
International, National, Regional, Local
Consequences: 3) ETHICS MATTERS
Economic dimension
Social dimension
Environ. dimension
Economic objectives
Social objectives
Environ. objectives
Economic criteria
Social criteria
Environ. criteria
SOCIETY
Weights in a social framework
Political Democracy
Economic Democracy
Sustainability
Precautionary Principle
Consequence: 4)THE AXIOMATIZATION ISSUE
K. Arrow, H. Raynaud (1986): “Social choice and
multicriterion decision making”
Desirable Properties for SMCE
Aggregation Conventions
The idea of social incommensurability implies:
• Multicriteria methods must be as simple as possible to guarantee transparency.
• Weights in this framework are clearly meaningful only as importance coefficients and not as trade-off. As a consequence, complete compensability cannot be implemented.
• Sensitivity and robustness analysis have to check the consequences on the final ranking of only some clear ethical positions and not of all the possible combinations of weights.
• Conflict analysis procedures explicitly looking for social compromises should integrate a SMCE exercise.
• In a policy framework, to have a ranking of all the alternatives is more useful than just to select one alternative only; this implies that dominated alternatives cannot be excluded a priori.
From the idea of technical incommensurability:
• Partial or complete non-compensability is an essential consistency requirement.
• Indifference and preference thresholds should be explicitly taken into account.
• Mixed information of the widest type should be addressed in a consistent way.
• Simplicity, meaning the use of as less parameters as possible, is a very desirable property.
• The hierarchical dimension of a policy problem should be explicitly considered.
Eff.
Altern. Compensab. Weights as
import.coeff. Mix. inf.
MAUT --- --- --- + ELECTRE 2 +++ +++ ++ + ELECTRE 3 +++ +++ ++ + REGIME (H,N,R,1983)
+++ +++ +++ +
REGIME (H,N, 1990)
+++ + - +++
NAIADE +++ ++ --- +++ AHP +++ - --- --- EVAMIX +++ + --- +++ PROMETHEE +++ + + + Martel & Zaras method
+++ +++ + +++
Simpl. Hier. prob.
From. Ind./pref. thresh.
Conf. Anal.
MAUT +++ --- --- --- --- ELECTRE 2 -- --- +++ ++ --- ELECTRE 3 --- --- +++ ++ --- REGIME (H,N,R,1983)
+++ --- ++ --- ---
REGIME (H,N, 1990)
+ --- ++ --- ---
NAIADE --- --- +++ ++ +++ AHP -- +++ ++ --- --- EVAMIX ++ --- ++ --- --- PROMETHEE -- --- +++ +++ --- Martel & Zaras method
--- --- +++ ++ ---
Table 1. Example of evaluation of some multicriteria methods according to proposed desirable properties for SMCE
Is SMCE relevant for the study of Sustainability?
Yang: ECONOMICS
GDP
Yin: ECOLOGY
QUALITY OF PRODUCT
PROCEDURAL RATIONALITY
LEARNING HOLARCHIES
QUALITY OF “SOCIAL” PROCESS
PARTICIPATION
TRANSPARENCY
MULTI/INTER-DISCIPLINARITY
ETHICSRESPONSIBILITY
CONSISTENCY
Social Multicriteria Evaluation
• MCDM (technocratic)• MCDA (technocratic)• non-algorithmic MCE
(loss of the algorithmic component)
• Participative MCE (loss of the algorithmic component)
•Social MCE •(how to integrate mathematical tools with social processes)
MCDMMCDA
MCDMMCDAPMCE
SMCESMCE