Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis: use in government agencies

  • Review
  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Government agencies are responsible for making complex, high-stake decisions, which require them to balance political, technical, and economic considerations. Pressure from stakeholders and administrative requirements necessitate a traceable and transparent method for decision making. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods are available to decision makers to facilitate systematic treatment of the information and factors necessary to make informed and effective decisions in complex circumstances. A survey of gray and academic literature was conducted to gauge the level of application and awareness of MCDA methods by US government agencies and determine if the tools’ benefits are being realized. Results show an increase in awareness and consideration of MCDA from 2000 to the present, and that agencies are especially considering and using tools to engage with stakeholders. Government agencies would benefit from extending the application of MCDA to strategic planning and congressional engagement, as well as by standardizing MCDA use to better enable inter-agency collaboration and communication.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambrasaite I, Barfod MB, Salling KB (2011) MCDA and risk analysis in transport infrastructure appraisals: The Rail Baltica case. In: Procedia—social and behavioral sciences, pp 944–953

  • Bana e Costa CA (2001) The use of multi-criteria decision analysis to support the search for less conflicting policy options in a multi-actor context: case study. J Multicriteria Decis Anal 125:111–125. doi:10.1002/mcda.292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beierle TC (2002) The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal 22:739–749. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.00065

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bots PW, Hulshof JA (2000) Designing multi-criteria decision analysis processes for priority setting in health policy. J Multicriteria Decis Anal 9:56–75. doi:10.1002/1099-1360(200001/05)9:1/3<56:AID-MCDA267>3.0.CO;2-E

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne D, O’Regan B, Moles R (2010) Use of multi-criteria decision analysis to explore alternative domestic energy and electricity policy scenarios in an Irish city-region. Energy 35:518–528. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.10.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christou MD, Mattarelli M (2000) Land-use planning in the vicinity of chemical sites: risk-informed decision making at a local community level. J Hazard Mater 78:191–222

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer JS (1990) Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Manag Sci 36:249–258. doi:10.1287/mnsc.36.3.249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feizizadeh B, Kienberger S, Kamran KV (2015) Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis approach for GIS-MCDA based economic vulnerability assessment. J Geogr Inf Sci 1:81–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernholz FR (2011) Multicriteria analysis for capital budgeting. In: Baker HK, English P (eds) Capital budgeting valuation: Financial analysis for today’s investment projects. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 463–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira AF, Spahr RW, Pereira JAM (2011) New bank trends, MCDA and financial decisions: insights and a framework for retail banking. Banks and Bank Syst 6(2):23–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamper CD, Turcanu C (2007) On the governmental use of multi-criteria analysis. Ecol Econ 62(2):298–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallerbach W, Spronk J (2002) A multidimensional framework for financial-economic decisions. J Multicriteria Decis Anal 11:111. doi:10.1002/mcda.324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard RA (2007) The foundations of decision analysis revisited. In: Edwards W, Miles RF Jr, von Winterfeldt D (eds) Advances in decision analysis: from foundations to applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 32–56

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huang IB, Keisler J, Linkov I (2011) Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends. Sci Total Environ 409:3578–3594. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.022

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Linkov I (2010) Emergent conditions and multiple criteria analysis in infrastructure prioritization for developing countries. J Multicriteria Decis Anal 16:125–137. doi:10.1002/mcda.444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives–preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kelkar M, Viechnicki P, Conlin P, Frey R, Strickland F (2016) Mission analytics: data-driven decision making in government. Deloitte University Press. http://dupress.deloitte.com/content/dam/dup-us-en/articles/3044_mission-analytics/DUP_Mission-Analytics.pdf

  • Kleinmuntz DN (2007) Resource allocation decisions. In: Edwards W, Miles RF Jr, von Winterfeldt D (eds) Advances in decision analysis: From foundations to applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 400–418

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov I, Moberg E (eds) (2012) Multi-criteria decision analysis: environmental applications and case studies. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov I, Varghese A, Jamil S et al (2004) Multi-criteria decision analysis: a framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. Comp Risk Assess Environ Decis Mak. doi:10.1007/1-4020-2243-3_2

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov I, Satterstrom FK, Tkachuk A et al (2007) A multi-criteria decision analysis approach for prioritization of performance metrics. In: Managing critical infrastructure risks, pp 261–298

  • Montibeller G, Franco LA, Lord E, Iglesias A (2009) Structuring resource allocation decisions: a framework for building multi-criteria portfolio models with area-grouped options. Eur J Oper Res 199(3):846–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Münzberg T, Berbner U, Comes T et al (2013) Decision support for critical infrastructure disruptions: an integrated approach to secure food supply. In: 10th international conference on information systems for crisis response and management, ISCRAM 2013, pp 312–316

  • Nigim KA, Hipel KW, Smith GB (2006) An effective multiple criteria approach to infrastructure reconstruction in devastated countries. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 15:232–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuclear Energy Agency [NEA] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2015) Stakeholder involvement in decision making: a short guide to issues, approaches and resources. http://www.oecd-nea.org/rwm/pubs/2015/7189-stakeholder-involvement-2015.pdf

  • Phillips L, Bana e Costa CA (2007) Transparent prioritization, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing. Ann Oper Res 154(1):51–68. doi:10.1007/s10479-007-0183-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues SB, Hickson DJ (1995) Success in decision making: different organizations, differing reasons for success. J Manag Stud 32:655–678. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00793.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rui Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (2016) Introduction. In: Greco S, Ehrgott M, Rui Figueira J (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art survey. Springer, Berlin, pp xix–xxxiii

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] (2016, October) Regulations.gov. https://www.regulations.gov

  • United States Executive Office of the President Office of Management and Budget [OMB] (2015, June) Circular A-11, preparation, submission, and execution of the budget, Part 6, executive summary, at 2; June 30, 2015 report. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/a11_current_year/a11_2015.pdf

  • United States Government Accountability Office [GAO] (1994, June) superfund: reauthorization and prioritization issues (GAO Publication No./T-RCED 94-250). U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. https://www.gao.gov/products/T-RCED-94-250

  • United States Government Accountability Office [GAO] (2016, December) National park service process exists for prioritizing asset maintenance decisions, but evaluation could improve efforts (GAO Publication No. 17-136). U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-136

  • United States Government Accountability Office [GAO] (2017, April) Aviation research and development: FAA could improve how it develops its portfolio and reports its activities (GAO Publication No.17-372). U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-372

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Laboratory, Engineer Research and Development Center, US Army Corps of Engineers, Concord, MA, 01742, USA

    Margaret H. Kurth, Sabrina Larkin & Igor Linkov

  2. College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA

    Jeffrey M. Keisler

Authors
  1. Margaret H. Kurth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sabrina Larkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey M. Keisler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Igor Linkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Igor Linkov.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kurth, M.H., Larkin, S., Keisler, J.M. et al. Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis: use in government agencies. Environ Syst Decis 37, 134–143 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-017-9644-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-017-9644-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation