IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v19y1992i2p237-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Average Value Ranking Multi-criteria Method for Project Evaluation in Regional Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Van Huylenbroeck, G
  • Martens, L

Abstract

A major problem in regional planning is the choice of the plan to be implemented. Because non-monetary effects are becoming more important, a multi-criteria method is presented allowing a ranking of the alternatives on the basis of several criteria by only taking into account ordinal priorities. After the methodology has been described the method is illustrated with an application for a land consolidation project in Belgium. Copyright 1992 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Huylenbroeck, G & Martens, L, 1992. "The Average Value Ranking Multi-criteria Method for Project Evaluation in Regional Planning," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 19(2), pages 237-252.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:19:y:1992:i:2:p:237-52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gonzalez, X.P. & Marey, M.F. & Alvarez, C.J., 2007. "Evaluation of productive rural land patterns with joint regard to the size, shape and dispersion of plots," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-3), pages 52-62, January.
    2. Selim, Tarek, 2000. "A Value-Added Social Welfare Optimization Problem For Micro-Sustainable Development," MPRA Paper 120581, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Seyed Farid Ghannadpour & Ali Reza Hoseini & Morteza Bagherpour & Elmira Ahmadi, 2021. "Appraising the triple bottom line utility of sustainable project portfolio selection using a novel multi-criteria house of portfolio," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 3396-3437, March.
    4. Gonzalez, X. P. & Alvarez, C. J. & Crecente, R., 2004. "Evaluation of land distributions with joint regard to plot size and shape," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 31-43, October.
    5. van Huylenbroeck, G., 1995. "The conflict analysis method: bridging the gap between ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and ORESTE," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 490-502, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:erevae:v:19:y:1992:i:2:p:237-52. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.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.