IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aolpei/96876.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Method for the Selection of Regions with Concentrated State Aid

Author

Listed:
  • Krejci, Igor
  • Voriskova, Andrea

Abstract

The paper deals with the analysis of a method used by the Czech Government and the Ministry for Regional Development to select regions with concentrated state aid. It contains a comparison with several different basic methods of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). The analysis focuses on a mathematical algorithm of the established MCDM method and does not consider validity of any selected socioeconomic criteria and their weights. Both the strengths and weaknesses of the used MCDM method are presented. The paper includes a simple proposal of the modification of the examined method that will prevent incorrect data normalisation used for region’s evaluation before revision in 2010. Data used for all calculations were obtained from the Ministry for Regional Development.

Suggested Citation

  • Krejci, Igor & Voriskova, Andrea, 2010. "Analysis of the Method for the Selection of Regions with Concentrated State Aid," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 2(3), pages 1-8, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aolpei:96876
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.96876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/96876/files/agris_on-line_2010_3_krejci_voriskova.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.96876?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stewart, TJ, 1992. "A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 569-586.
    2. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    2. Qiang Yang & Ping-an Du & Yong Wang & Bin Liang, 2017. "A rough set approach for determining weights of decision makers in group decision making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Wu-E Yang & Chao-Qun Ma & Zhi-Qiu Han, 2017. "Linguistic multi-criteria decision-making with representing semantics by programming," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 225-235, January.
    4. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
    5. Peng, Yi & Kou, Gang & Wang, Guoxun & Shi, Yong, 2011. "FAMCDM: A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 677-689, December.
    6. Tim Schröder & Lars-Peter Lauven & Beatriz Beyer & Nils Lerche & Jutta Geldermann, 2019. "Using PROMETHEE to assess bioenergy pathways," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 287-309, June.
    7. Sayers, T. M. & Jessop, A. T. & Hills, P. J., 2003. "Multi-criteria evaluation of transport options--flexible, transparent and user-friendly?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 95-105, April.
    8. Manojit Chattopadhyay & Subrata Kumar Mitra, 2017. "Applicability and effectiveness of classifications models for achieving the twin objectives of growth and outreach of microfinance institutions," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 451-474, December.
    9. G. Fischer & M. Makowski & J. Antoine, 1996. "Multiple Criteria Land Use Analysis," Working Papers wp96006, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    10. Alsyouf, Imad, 2009. "Maintenance practices in Swedish industries: Survey results," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 212-223, September.
    11. Anna Maria Kowalczyk & Szymon Czyża, 2022. "Optimising Photovoltaic Farm Location Using a Capabilities Matrix and GIS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-32, September.
    12. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    13. Aleksandra Łuczak & Małgorzata Just, 2020. "A Complex MCDM Procedure for the Assessment of Economic Development of Units at Different Government Levels," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Meng, Yangyang & Tian, Xiangliang & Li, Zhongwen & Zhou, Wei & Zhou, Zhijie & Zhong, Maohua, 2020. "Exploring node importance evolution of weighted complex networks in urban rail transit," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 558(C).
    15. Bana E Costa, Carlos A. & Stewart, Theodor J. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1997. "Multicriteria decision analysis: Some thoughts based on the tutorial and discussion sessions of the ESIGMA meetings," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 28-37, May.
    16. Kuo, Ting, 2017. "A modified TOPSIS with a different ranking index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 152-160.
    17. Peng, Honggang & Xiao, Zhi & Wang, Jianqiang & Li, Jian, 2021. "A decision support framework for new energy selection in rural areas from the perspectives of information reliability and criterion non-compensation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    18. Bennetto, Robert & Vuuren, Jan H van, 2021. "Multi-objective evolutionary search strategies in constraint programming," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    19. Heidary Dahooie, Jalil & Qorbani, Ali Reza & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Providing a framework for selecting the appropriate method of technology acquisition considering uncertainty in hierarchical group decision-making: Case Study: Interactive television technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Serhat KARAOGLAN & Serap SAHIN, 2018. "BIST XKMYA Isletmelerinin Finansal Performanslarinin Cok Kriterli Karar Verme Yontemleri Ile Olcumu ve Yontemlerin Karsilastirilmasi," Ege Academic Review, Ege University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 18(1), pages 63-80.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aolpei:96876. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fevszcz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.