IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v40y2012i1p42-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings

Author

Listed:
  • Morais, Danielle C.
  • de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira

Abstract

In problems to do with managing water resources multiple decision makers are involved, each acting in their own right and using different value systems. In the literature on management science, several procedures are proposed in order to establish a collective preference based on the aggregation of different individual preferences. However, the well-known methods that focus on a single winner have some inconveniences that should be addressed. This paper is focused on a group decision making procedure based on the analysis of individual rankings with the aim of choosing an appropriate alternative for a water resources problem. This alternative is found to be the best compromise from the points of view of all actors involved in the decision problem. The structure of the method is set out as is its application to the water resources problem. A comparison with other methods is presented and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Morais, Danielle C. & de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira, 2012. "Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 42-52, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:40:y:2012:i:1:p:42-52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048311000557
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    2. Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Prospect theory and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 961-971, October.
    3. N. F. Matsatsinis & E. Grigoroudis & A. Samaras, 2005. "Aggregation and Disaggregation of Preferences for Collective Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 217-232, May.
    4. Sawik, Tadeusz, 2010. "Single vs. multiple objective supplier selection in a make to order environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 203-212, June.
    5. Lahdelma, Risto & Makkonen, Simo & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 79-92, February.
    6. Franco, L. Alberto & Lord, Ewan, 2011. "Understanding multi-methodology: Evaluating the perceived impact of mixing methods for group budgetary decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 362-372, June.
    7. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2009. "Using expected values to simplify decision making under uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 312-330, April.
    8. Adiel Almeida, 2005. "Multicriteria Modelling of Repair Contract Based on Utility and ELECTRE I Method with Dependability and Service Quality Criteria," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 113-126, September.
    9. Bose, Utpal & Davey, Anne M. & Olson, David L., 1997. "Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-706, December.
    10. Xu, Zeshui, 2005. "Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 249-254, June.
    11. Vanessa Silva & Danielle Morais & Adiel Almeida, 2010. "A Multicriteria Group Decision Model to Support Watershed Committees in Brazil," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(14), pages 4075-4091, November.
    12. Brams, Steven J & Nagel, Jack H, 1991. "Approval Voting in Practice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 71(1-2), pages 1-17, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Tavana, M. & Kennedy, D. T. & Joglekar, P., 1996. "A group decision support framework for consensus ranking of technical manager candidates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 523-538, October.
    15. Saari, Donald G., 1999. "Explaining All Three-Alternative Voting Outcomes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 313-355, August.
    16. Cook, Wade D., 2006. "Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(2), pages 369-385, July.
    17. Nurmi, Hannu, 1983. "Voting Procedures: A Summary Analysis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 181-208, April.
    18. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    20. Smith, John H, 1973. "Aggregation of Preferences with Variable Electorate," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(6), pages 1027-1041, November.
    21. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    22. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1950. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 328-328.
    23. Jonathan Levin & Barry Nalebuff, 1995. "An Introduction to Vote-Counting Schemes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 3-26, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    2. Fernandez, Eduardo & Olmedo, Rafael, 2013. "An outranking-based general approach to solving group multi-objective optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 225(3), pages 497-506.
    3. Gong, Zaiwu & Xu, Xiaoxia & Zhang, Huanhuan & Aytun Ozturk, U. & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique & Xu, Chao, 2015. "The consensus models with interval preference opinions and their economic interpretation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-90.
    4. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Bayesian best-worst method: A probabilistic group decision making model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Sun, Bingzhen & Ma, Weimin, 2015. "An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 83-92.
    6. Liao, Huchang & Wu, Xingli & Mi, Xiaomei & Herrera, Francisco, 2020. "An integrated method for cognitive complex multiple experts multiple criteria decision making based on ELECTRE III with weighted Borda rule," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Xike Guan & Zengchuan Dong & Yun Luo & Dunyu Zhong, 2021. "Multi-Objective Optimal Allocation of River Basin Water Resources under Full Probability Scenarios Considering Wet–Dry Encounters: A Case Study of Yellow River Basin," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Tavares, L. Valadares, 2012. "An acyclic outranking model to support group decision making within organizations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 782-790.
    9. Peng Wu & Jinpei Liu & Ligang Zhou & Huayou Chen, 2022. "An Integrated Group Decision-Making Method with Hesitant Qualitative Information Based on DEA Cross-Efficiency and Priority Aggregation for Evaluating Factors Affecting a Resilient City," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 293-316, April.
    10. Ma, Li-Ching, 2016. "A new group ranking approach for ordinal preferences based on group maximum consensus sequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 171-181.
    11. Adiel T. Almeida & Tomasz Wachowicz, 2017. "Preference Analysis and Decision Support in Negotiations and Group Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 649-652, July.
    12. Adiel T. de Almeida-Filho & Madson B. S. Monte & Danielle C. Morais, 2017. "A Voting Approach Applied to Preventive Maintenance Management of a Water Supply System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 523-546, May.
    13. Galo, Nadya Regina & Calache, Lucas Daniel Del Rosso & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro, 2018. "A group decision approach for supplier categorization based on hesitant fuzzy and ELECTRE TRI," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 182-196.
    14. Feng, Bo & Lai, Fujun, 2014. "Multi-attribute group decision making with aspirations: A case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 136-147.
    15. Verdecho, María-José & Alfaro-Saiz, Juan-Jose & Rodriguez-Rodriguez, Raul & Ortiz-Bas, Angel, 2012. "A multi-criteria approach for managing inter-enterprise collaborative relationships," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 249-263.
    16. Babak Zolghadr-Asli & Omid Bozorg-Haddad & Maedeh Enayati & Xuefeng Chu, 2021. "A review of 20-year applications of multi-attribute decision-making in environmental and water resources planning and management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14379-14404, October.
    17. Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Ana Paula Cabral Seixas Costa, 2012. "Research Developments of Group Decision and Negotiation in Latin America," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 129-132, March.
    18. Danielle Costa Morais & Adiel Teixeira Almeida & José Rui Figueira, 2014. "A Sorting Model for Group Decision Making: A Case Study of Water Losses in Brazil," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 937-960, September.
    19. Marcella Maia Urtiga & Danielle Costa Morais & Keith W. Hipel & D. Marc Kilgour, 2017. "Group Decision Methodology to Support Watershed Committees in Choosing Among Combinations of Alternatives," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 729-752, July.
    20. Yu, Ming-Miin & Chern, Ching-Chin & Hsiao, Bo, 2013. "Human resource rightsizing using centralized data envelopment analysis: Evidence from Taiwan's Airports," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 119-130.
    21. Adiel T. Almeida & Danielle C. Morais, 2014. "New Methods and Models of Group Decision and Negotiation Presented in Recife," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 349-353, May.
    22. Flavio Trojan & Danielle Morais, 2015. "Maintenance Management Decision Model for Reduction of Losses in Water Distribution Networks," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(10), pages 3459-3479, August.
    23. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Ongkowijoyo, Citra Satria, 2015. "Reliability-based decision making for selection of ready-mix concrete supply using stochastic superiority and inferiority ranking method," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 29-39.
    24. Kadziński, Miłosz & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2013. "RUTA: A framework for assessing and selecting additive value functions on the basis of rank related requirements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 735-751.

    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. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    2. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    3. Adiel T. de Almeida-Filho & Madson B. S. Monte & Danielle C. Morais, 2017. "A Voting Approach Applied to Preventive Maintenance Management of a Water Supply System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 523-546, May.
    4. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mariano Jiménez & Mar Arenas-Parra, 2016. "A group decision making model based on goal programming with fuzzy hierarchy: an application to regional forest planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 137-162, October.
    5. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    6. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Marcella Maia Urtiga & Danielle Costa Morais & Keith W. Hipel & D. Marc Kilgour, 2017. "Group Decision Methodology to Support Watershed Committees in Choosing Among Combinations of Alternatives," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 729-752, July.
    8. Akbari, Sina & Escobedo, Adolfo R., 2023. "Beyond kemeny rank aggregation: A parameterizable-penalty framework for robust ranking aggregation with ties," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    10. Muhammad Abdullah Khalid & Yousaf Ali, 2020. "Economic impact assessment of natural disaster with multi-criteria decision making for interdependent infrastructures," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7287-7311, December.
    11. Sun, Bingzhen & Ma, Weimin, 2015. "An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 83-92.
    12. Kubińska, Elżbieta & Adamczyk-Kowalczuk, Magdalena & Andrzejewski, Mariusz & Rozakis, Stelios, 2022. "Incorporating the status quo effect into the decision making process: The case of municipal companies merger," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    13. De Smet, Yves & Nemery, Philippe & Selvaraj, Ramkumar, 2012. "An exact algorithm for the multicriteria ordered clustering problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 861-869.
    14. Gong, Zaiwu & Xu, Xiaoxia & Zhang, Huanhuan & Aytun Ozturk, U. & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique & Xu, Chao, 2015. "The consensus models with interval preference opinions and their economic interpretation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-90.
    15. Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Homogenous Groups’ Preferences by Using AIP and AIJ Group AHP-PROMETHEE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Syed Hammad Mian & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Strategic Outcome Using Fuzzy-AHP-Based Decision Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-22, October.
    17. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    18. Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Bernard De Baets, 2018. "The supercovering relation, the pairwise winner, and more missing links between Borda and Condorcet," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 329-352, February.
    19. Marttunen, Mika & Belton, Valerie & Lienert, Judit, 2018. "Are objectives hierarchy related biases observed in practice? A meta-analysis of environmental and energy applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 178-194.
    20. Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Chang, Wei-Chen & Li, Wei-Hao & Lin, Zu-Liang, 2013. "Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 462-469.

    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:eee:jomega:v:40:y:2012:i:1:p:42-52. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.