Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The MACBETH approach for multi-criteria evaluation of development projects on cross-cutting issues

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The European Union’s efforts for poverty reduction are based on the principle of Sustainable Human Development. Meeting the terms of this principle entails the consideration of aspects of general interest, known as “cross-cutting issues”, at all levels of intervention. Cross-cutting issues comprise issues like human rights, gender equity, environmental concern, democracy as a social value, or the participation and empowerment of the beneficiaries of development. These issues concern social phenomena that are difficult to isolate in time or capture empirically, causing operational difficulties when projects are subjected to evaluation. Traditional methods of project evaluation, such as Cost Benefit Analysis or the Logic Framework, struggle to incorporate impacts that are difficult to measure or estimate in terms of indicators or monetary value. Therefore, in the field work at a rural development programme located in Bolivia, a need arose spontaneously to find and implement an approach that, complementary to traditional methods of project evaluation, could allow project managers to keep an eye on project performances in terms of cross-cutting issues. This article describes how the MACBETH multicriteria approach was implemented in practice, in order to help an important rural development programme build a project evaluation tool, taking into account cross-cutting issues through a series of interviews and decision conferences attended by specialists and the programme staff.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bana Consulting (2005). M-MACBETH version 1.1: user manual. Lisbon.

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., & Beinat, E. (2005). Model-structuring in public decision-aiding (LSEOR 05.79). The London School of Economics and Political Science.

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., & Chagas, M. P. (2004). A career choice problem: an example of how to use MACBETH to build a quantitative value model based on qualitative value judgments. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 323–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., & Vansnick, J. C. (1994). MACBETH—an interactive path towards the construction of cardinal value functions. International Transactions in Operational Research, 1(4), 489–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., & Vansnick, J. C. (1999). The MACBETH approach: basic ideas, software, and an application. In N. Meskens & M. Roubens (Eds.), Mathematical modelling: theory and applications: Vol. 4. Advances in decision analysis (pp. 131–157). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., De Corte, J. M., & Vansnick, J. C. (2003). MACBETH (LSEOR 03.56). The London School of Economics and Political Science.

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., Antão da Silva, P., & Correia, F. N. (2004). Multicriteria evaluation of flood control measures: the case of Ribeira do Livramento. Water Resources Management, 18(3), 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., De Corte, J. M., & Vansnick, J. C. (2005). On the mathematical foundations of MACBETH. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 409–442). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., Fernandes, T. G., & Correia, P. V. D. (2006). Prioritisation of public investments in social infra-structures using multicriteria value analysis and decision conferencing: a case-study. International Transactions in Operational Research, 13(4), 279–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., Lourenco, J. C., Chagas, M. P., & Bana e Costa, J. C. (2008). Development of reusable bid evaluation models for the Portuguese electric transmission company. Decision Analysis, 5(1), 22–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bana e Costa, C. A., De Corte, J. M., & Vansnick, J. C. (2010). MACBETH: measuring attractiveness by a categorical based evaluation technique. In J. J. Cochran (Ed.), Wiley encyclopedia of operations research and management science. New York: Wiley. (Published online: 15 Feb 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazoberry Chali, G. (2005). La participación ciudadana en el desarrollo local. In PRAEDAC. Responsabilidad social y desarrollo: análisis multicriterio para la evaluación de proyectos (pp. 115–130). Cochabamba: Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia y Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouyssou, D., Marchant, T., Pirlot, M., Perny, P., Tsoukiàs, A., & Vincke, P. (2000). Evaluation and decision models: a critical perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brolin, T. (2007). The EU and its policies on development cooperation: a learning material, 2007:1. Swedish Agency for Development Evaluation, Karlstad.

  • Dasgupta, A. K., & Pearce, D. W. (1972). Cost benefit analysis, theory and practice. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W., & Barron, F. H. (1994). SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(3), 306–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (1997). Manual: financial and economic analysis of development projects. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2001). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 8 May 2001: The European Union’s role in promoting human rights and democratisation in third countries.

  • European Commission (2006). The European Consensus on Development: The development challenge—joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of Member States meeting within the council, the European Parliament and the Commission on European Union Development Policy: “The European Consensus”. Official Journal of the European Union, 2006/C 46/01.

  • EVO (1997). Evaluación: una herramienta de gestión para mejorar el desempeño de los proyectos. Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID). Oficina de Evaluación (EVO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fasolo, B., & Bana e Costa, C. A. (2009). Tailoring value elicitation to decision makers’ numeracy and fluency: expressing value judgments in numbers or words. London School of Economics.

  • French, S. (1988). Decision theory: an introduction to the mathematics of rationality. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayraud, E. (2005). Implementación del sistema de evaluación rápida en el PRAEDAC. In PRAEDAC. Responsabilidad social y desarrollo: análisis multicriterio para la evaluación de proyectos (pp. 149–154). Cochabamba: Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia y Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayraud, E., & Quiroga, E. (2005). Promoviendo el desarrollo con responsabilidad social. In PRAEDAC. Responsabilidad social y desarrollo: análisis multicriterio para la evaluación de proyectos (pp. 11–21). Cochabamba: Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia y Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabisch, M., & Labreuche, C. (2010). A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid. Annals of Operation Research, 175(1), 247–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value focused thinking: a path to creative decision making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decision with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, C. W. (1997). Strategic decision making: multiobjective decision analysis with spreadsheets. Belmont: Duxbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tverksky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement: Vol. I. Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishan, E. J. (1988). Cost-benefit analysis. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munda, G. (1996). Cost-benefit analysis in integrated environmental assessment: some methodological issues. Ecological Economics, 19(2), 157–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardini, A. (1998). Improving decision-making for land-use management: key ideas for an integrated approach based on MCA negotiation forums. In E. Beinat & P. Nijkamp (Eds.), Multicriteria analysis for land-use management (pp. 197–223). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijkamp, P. (1980). Environmental policy analysis. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, L. D., & Bana e Costa, C. A. (2007). Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing. Annals of Operation Research, 154(1), 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PRAEDAC (2005). Responsabilidad social y desarrollo: análisis multicriterio para la evaluación de proyectos (p. 177). Cochabamba: Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia y Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • PRAEDAC (2006). 8 años en el desarrollo—trópico de Cochabamba. Cochabamba: Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia y Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagoff, M. (1988). The economy of the earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Lopez, R. (2005). El sistema de evaluación rápida de proyectos respecto a temas transversales. In PRAEDAC. Responsabilidad social y desarrollo: análisis multicriterio para la evaluación de proyectos (pp. 55–74). Cochabamba: Delegación de la Comisión Europea en Bolivia y Viceministerio de Desarrollo Alternativo del Gobierno de Bolivia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Lopez, R. (2008). Evaluating development projects based on multiple intangible criteria: theoretical framework and applications to coca-producing regions of Bolivia. PhD thesis, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

  • von Winterfeldt, D., & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioural research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, S. R., & Buede, D. M. (1987). Decision synthesis: the principles and practice of decision analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KERMIT, Research Unit Knowledge-Based Systems, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Ramiro Sanchez-Lopez & Bernard De Baets

  2. Centre for Management Studies of Instituto Superior Técnico, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Ramiro Sanchez-Lopez & Carlos A. Bana e Costa

  3. Management Science Group, Department of Management, London School of Economics, London, UK

    Carlos A. Bana e Costa

Authors
  1. Ramiro Sanchez-Lopez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlos A. Bana e Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernard De Baets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramiro Sanchez-Lopez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanchez-Lopez, R., Bana e Costa, C.A. & De Baets, B. The MACBETH approach for multi-criteria evaluation of development projects on cross-cutting issues. Ann Oper Res 199, 393–408 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0877-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0877-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation