Resolving opposed judgments in resource allocation decisions

Abstract

Consider two groups of policymakers each important in determining the assignment of resources to various multiple outcome programs. Suppose each group assigns values to the program outcomes associated with policy goals and objectives, determines the effectiveness parameters relating program options to program outcomes, and strives for optimal allocations consistent with the availability of total resources. Since judgments concerning value and effectiveness assignments are likely to differ, the respective allocations would also differ. Various prescriptions for obtaining a consensus allocation are evaluated. A preferred approach relies on concepts borrowed from the theory of cooperative games.