IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v20y2011i6d10.1007_s10726-009-9184-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Egalitarianism and Utilitarianism in Multiple Criteria Decision Problems with Partial Information

Author

Listed:
  • M. A. Hinojosa

    (Universidad Pablo de Olavide)

  • A. M. Mármol

    (Universidad de Sevilla)

Abstract

Egalitarianism and utilitarianism can be viewed as two opposed axiomatic principles from where to begin the search of appropriate solutions to multi-criteria problems. When a vector of criterion weights is provided, these two principles yield respectively to weighted maxmin solutions, and to weighted utilitarian solutions. However, if only partial information about the importance of the criteria is available, the situation becomes more complex and a variety of solutions which extend the utilitarian and the maxmin solution arise. In this paper we explore some of these solutions and their axiomatic properties. If a utilitarian principle is first considered and a pessimistic or an optimistic rule applied afterwards, then two new solution concepts arise. Utilitarian solutions based on the pessimistic rule are inequality averse, and therefore can be viewed as a compromise between the egalitarian and utilitarian solutions. We also explore the solutions obtained when an egalitarian principle with respect to the criteria is considered and a pessimistic or an optimistic rule is applied to select criterion weights.

Suggested Citation

  • M. A. Hinojosa & A. M. Mármol, 2011. "Egalitarianism and Utilitarianism in Multiple Criteria Decision Problems with Partial Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 707-724, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:20:y:2011:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-009-9184-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-009-9184-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-009-9184-8
    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/s10726-009-9184-8?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. Hansen, Pierre & Labbe, Martine & Wendell, Richard E., 1989. "Sensitivity analysis in multiple objective linear programming: The tolerance approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 63-69, January.
    2. Contreras, I. & Marmol, A.M., 2007. "A lexicographical compromise method for multiple criteria group decision problems with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1530-1539, September.
    3. M. Hinojosa & A. Mármol & J. Zarzuelo, 2008. "Inequality averse multi-utilitarian bargaining solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 37(4), pages 597-618, December.
    4. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    5. João N. Clímaco & Luis C. Dias, 2006. "An Approach to Support Negotiation Processes with Imprecise Information Multicriteria Additive Models," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 171-184, March.
    6. Ahn, Byeong Seok & Sam Park, Kyung & Hee Han, Chang & Kyeong Kim, Jae, 2000. "Multi-attribute decision aid under incomplete information and hierarchical structure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 431-439, September.
    7. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    8. Richard E. Wendell, 1985. "The Tolerance Approach to Sensitivity Analysis in Linear Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 564-578, May.
    9. Weber, Martin, 1987. "Decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 44-57, January.
    10. Yano, Hitoshi & Sakawa, Masatoshi, 1989. "A unified approach for characterizing Pareto optimal solutions of multiobjective optimization problems: The hyperplane method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 61-70, March.
    11. Kim, Soung Hie & Choi, Sang Hyun & Kim, Jae Kyeong, 1999. "An interactive procedure for multiple attribute group decision making with incomplete information: Range-based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 139-152, October.
    12. Marmol, Amparo M. & Puerto, Justo & Fernandez, Francisco R., 2002. "Sequential incorporation of imprecise information in multiple criteria decision processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 123-133, February.
    13. Richard E. Wendell, 2004. "Tolerance Sensitivity and Optimality Bounds in Linear Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 797-803, June.
    14. Marmol, A. M. & Puerto, J., 1997. "Special cases of the tolerance approach in multiobjective linear programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 610-616, May.
    15. Carrizosa, E. & Conde, E. & Fernandez, F. R. & Puerto, J., 1995. "Multi-criteria analysis with partial information about the weighting coefficients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 291-301, March.
    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. A. Zapata & A. M. Mármol & L. Monroy & M. A. Caraballo, 2019. "A Maxmin Approach for the Equilibria of Vector-Valued Games," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 415-432, April.

    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. Hinojosa, M.A. & Mármol, A.M., 2011. "Axial solutions for multiple objective linear problems. An application to target setting in DEA models with preferences," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 159-167, April.
    2. Contreras, I. & Marmol, A.M., 2007. "A lexicographical compromise method for multiple criteria group decision problems with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1530-1539, September.
    3. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2015. "Extreme point-based multi-attribute decision analysis with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 748-755.
    4. Salo, Ahti & Punkka, Antti, 2005. "Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 338-356, June.
    5. Gül Özerol & Esra Karasakal, 2008. "A Parallel between Regret Theory and Outranking Methods for Multicriteria Decision Making Under Imprecise Information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 45-70, August.
    6. A Mateos & S Ríos-Insua & A Jiménez, 2007. "Dominance, potential optimality and alternative ranking in imprecise multi-attribute decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(3), pages 326-336, March.
    7. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    8. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    9. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    10. Eduarda Asfora Frej & Danielle Costa Morais & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida, 2022. "Negotiation Support Through Interactive Dominance Relationship Specification," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 591-620, June.
    11. Ahn, Byeong Seok & Park, Haechurl, 2014. "Establishing dominance between strategies with interval judgments of state probabilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 53-59.
    12. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    13. Marmol, A. M. & Puerto, J., 1997. "Special cases of the tolerance approach in multiobjective linear programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 610-616, May.
    14. Eeva Vilkkumaa & Ahti Salo & Juuso Liesiö, 2014. "Multicriteria Portfolio Modeling for the Development of Shared Action Agendas," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 49-70, January.
    15. Jong Hyen Kim & Byeong Seok Ahn, 2020. "The Hierarchical VIKOR Method with Incomplete Information: Supplier Selection Problem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-15, November.
    16. Pereira Borges, Ana Rosa & Henggeler Antunes, Carlos, 2002. "A visual interactive tolerance approach to sensitivity analysis in MOLP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 357-381, October.
    17. João N. Clímaco & Luis C. Dias, 2006. "An Approach to Support Negotiation Processes with Imprecise Information Multicriteria Additive Models," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 171-184, March.
    18. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    19. Han, Chang Hee & Kim, Jae Kyeong & Choi, Sang Hyun, 2004. "Prioritizing engineering characteristics in quality function deployment with incomplete information: A linear partial ordering approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 235-249, October.
    20. Pavel Anselmo Alvarez Carrillo & Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli & Eduarda Asfora Frej & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2022. "Selecting an agricultural technology package based on the flexible and interactive tradeoff method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(2), pages 377-392, July.

    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:grdene:v:20:y:2011:i:6:d:10.1007_s10726-009-9184-8. 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.