Constructing, evaluating and visualizing value and utility functions for decision support

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 46, Issue , 2013, Pages 283-291

  Reichert, Peter ^a   Schuwirth, Nele ^a   Langhans, Simone ^a,b  

^a SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY AND INLAND FISHERIES   (Germany)

Author keywords

Decision support; Ecological river assessment; Environmental management; Multi criteria decision analysis; River management; Uncertainty; Utility functions; Value functions

Indexed keywords

DECISION SUPPORTS; ECOLOGICAL RIVERS; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS; RIVER MANAGEMENT; UNCERTAINTY; UTILITY FUNCTIONS; VALUE FUNCTIONS;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; DECISION THEORY; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; TOOLS;

FUNCTION EVALUATION;

DECISION ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; RIVER MANAGEMENT; SOFTWARE; STAKEHOLDER; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VALUATION; VISUALIZATION;

EID: 84892525511     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.01.017     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Astin L.E. Data synthesis and bioindicator development for nontidal streams in the interstate Potomac River basin, USA. Ecological Indicators 2006, 6:664-685.
2. Barbour M.T., Swietlik W.F., Jackson S.K., Courtemanch D.L., Davies S.P., Yoder C.O. Measuring the attainment of biological integrity in the USA: a critical element of ecological integrity. Hydrobiologia 2000, 422/423:453-464.
3. Beinat E. Value Functions for Environmental Management 1997, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
4. Belton V., Gear T. On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies. Omega 1983, 11(3):228-230.
5. Birk S., van Kouwen L., Willby N. Harmonising the bioassessment of large rivers in the absence of near-natural reference conditions a case study of the Danube River. Freshwater Biology 2012, 57:1716-1732.
6. Brans J.P., Vincke P., Mareschal B. How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research 1986, 24:228-238.
7. Bundi U., Peter A., Frutiger A., Hütte M., Liechti P., Sieber U. Scientific base and modular concept for comprehensive assessment of streams in Switzerland. Hydrobiologia 2000, 422/423:477-487.
8. Cao Y., Hawkins C.P. The comparability of bioassessments: a review of conceptual and methodological issues. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 2011, 30(3):680-701.
9. Clemen R.T. Making Hard Decisions 1996, PWS-Kent, Boston. second ed.
10. Dyer J.S. Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 1990, 36(3):249-258.
11. Dyer J.S., Sarin R.K. Measurable multiattribute value functions. Operations Research 1979, 27(4):810-822.
12. Dyer J.S., Sarin R.K. Relative risk aversion. Management Science 1982, 28(8):875-886.
13. Eisenführ F., Weber M., Langer T. Rational Decision Making 2010, Springer, Berlin.
14. French S., Xu D.-L. Comparison study of multi-attribute decision analytic software. Journal of Multi Criteria Decision Analysis 2005, 13:65-80.
15. Keeney R.L. Value-focused Thinking 1992, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
16. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives 1993, Cambridge University Press, First published in 1976.
17. Lahdelma R., Salminen P., Hokkanen J. Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environmental Management 2000, 26(6):595-605.
18. Langhans S.D., Reichert P. Einbettung von Verfahren zur Fliessgewässerbewertung in ein übergeordnetes Gewässermanagementkonzept. Wasser Energie Luft 2011, 103(3):204-214.
19. Mendoza G.A., Martins H. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: a critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. Forest Ecology and Management 2006, 230:1-22.
20. Patchak W.M. Decision analysis: survey highlights new features and trends, but the relationship between technology and thoughtful analysis remains essential to the success of any software tool. OR/MS Today 2012, 39(5):38. http://www.orms-today.org/surveys/das/das.html.
21. Raven P.J., Holmes N.T.H., Dawson M., Everard F.H. Quality assessment using river habitat survey data. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 1998, 8:477-499.
22. Reichert P., Borsuk M., Hostmann M., Schweizer S., Spörri C., Tockner K., Truffer B. Concepts of decision support for river rehabilitation. Environmental Modelling and Software 2007, 22:188-201.
23. Reichert P., Schuwirth N., Langhans S.D. MCWM - Ein Konzept für multikriterielle Entscheidungsunterstützung im Wassermanagement. Wasser Energie Luft 2011, 103(2):139-148.
24. Saaty T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process 1980, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
25. Saaty T.L. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 1994, 24:19-43.
26. Schuwirth N., Reichert P., Lienert J. Methodological aspects of multi-criteria decision analysis for policy support: a case study on pharmaceutical removal from hospital wastewater. European Journal of Operational Research 2012, 220:472-483.
27. Schwenk W.S., Donovan T.M., Keeton W.S., Nunery J.S. Carbon storage, timber production, and biodiversity: comparing ecosystem services with multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecological Applications 2012, 22(5):1612-1627.
28. Vincke P. Outranking approach. Multicriteria Decision Making: Advances in MCDM Models, Algorithms, Theory, and Applications 1999, Kluwer, (Chapter 11). T. Gal (Ed.).
29. Wang X., Triantaphyllou E. Rank irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega 2008, 36:45-63.