Qualitative Multicriteria Methods in the Netherlands

  • Ron Janssen
  • Peter Nijkamp
  • Piet Rietveld
Conference paper

Abstract

The evaluation of any type of economic development requires a broad (i.e. multi-dimensional) analytical framework in order to capture all relevant socio-economic aspects. For instance, the assessment of monument conservation strategies, of environmental management projects or medical health care programmes includes a wide variety of external effects (which are often also of an intangible nature) which cannot be adequately covered by means of conventional pricing systems; the «measuring rod of money» can only be used as the analytical tool par excellence, if the assumption of a perfectly operating market system is plausible. Only in such cases the notion of a willingness to pay and of a consumer surplus (necessary to estimate the social benefits of a proposed action) is meaningful.

Keywords

Nuclear Plant Choice Option Multicriteria Analysis Concordance Analysis Multicriteria Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Frisch, R. (1976), “Cooperation between politicians and econometricians on the formalization of political preferences”, Economic Planning Studies, Reidel, Dordrecht, 41–86.Google Scholar
  2. Herwijnen, M. van and Janssen, R. (1989), “DEFINITE, a support System for decisions on a finite set of alternatives”, in A.C. Lockett and G. Islei (eds.), Improving Decision Making in Organisations, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol. 335, Springer-Verlag, Heidelber, 534–543.Google Scholar
  3. Hinloopen, E., Nijkamp, P. and Rietveld, P. (1983), “Qualitative discrete multiple criteria choice models in regional planning”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 13, 77–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hinloopen, E. and Nijkamp, P. (1988), “Qualitative multiple choice analysis: the dominant Regime method”, Quality and Quantity, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  5. Hogg, R.V. and Craig, A. T. (1970), Introduction to Mathematical Statistics, MacMillan, London, 1970.Google Scholar
  6. Jacquet-Lagrèze, E. and Siskos, J. (1982), “Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision making, the UTA method”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 10, 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Janssen, R. and Hafkamp, W. (1986), “A decision support system for conflict analysis”, The Annals of Regional Science, vol. 20, 3, 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Janssen, R. and Rietveld, P. (1985), “Multicriteria evaluation of land-reallotment plans: a case study”, Environment and Planning A, vol. 17, 1653–1668.Google Scholar
  9. Kmietowics, Z.W. and Pearman, D.A. (1981), Decision Theory and Incomplete Knowledge, Gower, Alderschot, U.K.Google Scholar
  10. Nijkamp, P. (1971), Environmental Policy Analysis, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Nijkamp, P., Leitner, H. and Wrigley, N. (eds.) (1985), Measuring the Unmeasurable, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  12. Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P. and Voogd, H. (1989), Multicriteria Evaluation in Physical Planning, North Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  13. Paelinck, J. (1976), “Qualitative multiple criteria analysis, environmental protection and multiregional development”, Papers of the Regional Science Association, vol. 36, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Paelinck, J.H.P. (1977), “Qualitative multiple criteria analysis; an application to airport location”, Environment and Planning, vol. 9, 883–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rietveld, P. (1980), Multiple Objective Decision Methods in Regional Planning, North Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  16. Rietveld, P. (1984), “The use of qualitative information in macro economic policy analysis”, in M. Despontin et al. (eds.), Macro Economic Planning with Conflicting Goals, Springer- Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  17. Rietveld, P. (1988), Beslissings Ondersteunend Systeem voor Discrete Al ternat ieven (BOSDA). Gevoeligheidsanalyses bij Multicriteria Beslissingsmethoden, Institut voor Milieuvraagstukken, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  18. Rietveld, P. (1989), “Using ordinal information in decision making under uncertainty”, Systems Analysis, Modeling, Simulation, vol. 6, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  19. Rietveld, P. and Janssen, R. (1989), “Sensitivity Analysis in Discrete Multiple Criteria Decision Problems; on the Siting of Nuclear Power Plants”, Research Memorandum, Department of Economics, Free University, Amsterdam, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. Roy, B. (1968), “Classement et choix en presence de points de vue multiples (la methode ELECTRE)”, RIRO, vol. 2, 57–75.Google Scholar
  21. Taha, H.A. (1976), Operations Research, MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Van Delft, A. and Nijkamp, P. (1977), Multicriteria Analysis and Regional Decision Making, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  23. Voogd, H. (1983), Multicriteria Evaluation for Urban and Regional Planning, Pion, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ron Janssen
    • 1
  • Peter Nijkamp
    • 1
  • Piet Rietveld
    • 1
  1. 1.Free UniversityAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations