IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v341y2024i2d10.1007_s10479-024-06197-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AHP based on scenarios and the optimism coefficient for new and risky projects: case of independent criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Helena Gaspars-Wieloch

    (Poznan University of Economics and Business)

Abstract

AHP is a well-known multi-criteria procedure which has been investigated and developed by many researchers and practitioners. Some AHP modifications are designed for decision making under uncertainty. The goal of this paper is to present a new AHP approach which can be useful in the case of uncertain one-shot decisions and independent criteria. The method proposed in the article is based on scenario planning, features characteristic for the Hurwicz rule (i.e. the use of the optimism coefficient) and on a scenario set reduction. The novel procedure gives the possibility to generate a relatively small number of pairwise comparison matrices thanks to the reduction of the initial sets of scenarios. The modified version of AHP may be helpful when the decision maker’s knowledge about probabilities of the occurrence of particular scenarios is partial. Such a situation occurs in the case of innovative, innovation and risky projects for which historical data are not known. The idea of the suggested scenario-based AHP is to adjust the final choice not only to the decision makers’ preferences (concerning criteria for example), but also to their nature, attitude towards risk, predictions, expectations and fears.

Suggested Citation

  • Helena Gaspars-Wieloch, 2024. "AHP based on scenarios and the optimism coefficient for new and risky projects: case of independent criteria," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 341(2), pages 937-961, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:341:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-024-06197-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-024-06197-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-024-06197-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-024-06197-w?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
    ---><---

    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. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    2. Ian Durbach, 2019. "Scenario planning in the analytic hierarchy process," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), June.
    3. Hamidreza Eskandari & Luis Rabelo, 2007. "Handling Uncertainty In The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Stochastic Approach," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(01), pages 177-189.
    4. Paulson, Dan & Zahir, Sajjad, 1995. "Consequences of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process: A simulation approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 45-56, November.
    5. Hauser, David & Tadikamalla, Pandu, 1996. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process in an uncertain environment: A simulation approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 27-37, May.
    6. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    7. Anjali Singh & Anjana Gupta & Aparna Mehra, 2020. "Matrix games with 2-tuple linguistic information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(2), pages 895-910, April.
    8. Helena Gaspars-Wieloch, 2021. "Scenario planning combined with probabilities as a risk management tool - analysis of pros and cons," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(1), pages 22-40.
    9. Marcin Anholcer & Volodymyr Babiy & Sándor Bozóki & Waldemar Koczkodaj, 2011. "A simplified implementation of the least squares solution for pairwise comparisons matrices," 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. 19(4), pages 439-444, December.
    10. Durbach, Ian N., 2014. "Outranking under uncertainty using scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 98-108.
    11. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1998. "A simulation approach for handling uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 116-122, April.
    12. R. Blanquero & E. Carrizosa & E. Conde, 2006. "Inferring Efficient Weights from Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 64(2), pages 271-284, October.
    13. Officer, R.R. & Anderson, Jock R., 1968. "Risk, Uncertainty and Farm Management Decisions," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 36(01), pages 1-17, March.
    14. Rosenbloom, E. S., 1997. "A probabilistic interpretation of the final rankings in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 371-378, January.
    15. Dianfa Wu & Zhiping Yang & Ningling Wang & Chengzhou Li & Yongping Yang, 2018. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model and AHP Weighting Uncertainty Analysis for Sustainability Assessment of Coal-Fired Power Units," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    16. Leandro Maciel & Rosangela Ballini & Fernando Gomide, 2018. "Evolving fuzzy modelling for yield curve forecasting," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(3), pages 290-311.
    17. Víctor M. Albornoz & Marcelo I. Véliz & Rodrigo Ortega & Virna Ortíz-Araya, 2020. "Integrated versus hierarchical approach for zone delineation and crop planning under uncertainty," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 286(1), pages 617-634, March.
    18. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    19. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    20. Predrag Mimović & Jelena Stanković & Vesna Janković Milić, 2015. "Decision-making under uncertainty – the integrated approach of the AHP and Bayesian analysis," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 868-878, January.
    21. Beynon, Malcolm, 2002. "DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 148-164, July.
    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. Ian Durbach, 2019. "Scenario planning in the analytic hierarchy process," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), June.
    2. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    3. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Fatih Tüysüz, 2018. "Simulated Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets-Based Approach for Modeling Uncertainty in AHP Method," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 801-817, May.
    5. Helena Gaspars-Wieloch & Dominik Gawroński, 2024. "How can one improve SAW and max-min multi-criteria rankings based on uncertain decision rules?," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 34(1), pages 131-148.
    6. Cox, M.A.A., 2007. "Examining alternatives in the interval analytic hierarchy process using complete enumeration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(2), pages 957-962, July.
    7. Helena Gaspars-Wieloch, 2021. "The Assignment Problem in Human Resource Project Management under Uncertainty," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    9. Durbach, Ian & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2014. "The analytic hierarchy process with stochastic judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(2), pages 552-559.
    10. Helena Gaspars-Wieloch, 2020. "A New Application for the Goal Programming—The Target Decision Rule for Uncertain Problems," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, November.
    11. Gaspars-Wieloch Helena, 2021. "On some analogies between one-criterion decision making under uncertainty and multi-criteria decision making under certainty," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 7(2), pages 17-36, June.
    12. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    13. A Jessop, 2011. "Using imprecise estimates for weights," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1048-1055, June.
    14. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.
    15. Leung, L. C. & Cao, D., 2000. "On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 102-113, July.
    16. Georgia Dede & Thomas Kamalakis & Dimosthenis Anagnostopoulos, 2022. "A framework of incorporating confidence levels to deal with uncertainty in pairwise comparisons," 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. 30(3), pages 1051-1069, September.
    17. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    18. Valentin Bertsch & Wolf Fichtner, 2016. "A participatory multi-criteria approach for power generation and transmission planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 177-207, October.
    19. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    20. Ozdemir, Mujgan S. & Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "The unknown in decision making: What to do about it," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 349-359, October.

    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:spr:annopr:v:341:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-024-06197-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.