IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v21y2012i2d10.1007_s10726-011-9266-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Use of Ranking Veto Concept to Mitigate the Compensatory Effects of Additive Aggregation in Group Decisions on a Water Utility Automation Investment

Author

Listed:
  • Suzana de Suzana Dantas Daher

    (Federal University of Pernambuco)

  • Adiel Teixeira Almeida

    (Federal University of Pernambuco)

Abstract

The use of additive models for aggregating group decisions implies they have a compensatory effect in the process of aggregating all decision makers’ (DMs’) preferences. In this kind of model, the final result may produce some extremely undesirable alternatives for one or more DMs. Such alternatives may emerge with a higher ranking than desirable ones, thus generating conflicts and regrets. To overcome this problem the concept of ranking veto is introduced based on a reduction factor combined with the utility of the alternative in order to penalize conflicting alternatives and reduce disagreements in an additive model. A water utility problem was considered as a numerical application to illustrate the model. A decision group method based on MAUT, utility thresholds and a reduction factor is proposed to support group decision in selecting regions that will receive investments in automation over the next 4 years.

Suggested Citation

  • Suzana de Suzana Dantas Daher & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2012. "The Use of Ranking Veto Concept to Mitigate the Compensatory Effects of Additive Aggregation in Group Decisions on a Water Utility Automation Investment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 185-204, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:21:y:2012:i:2:d:10.1007_s10726-011-9266-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-011-9266-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-011-9266-2
    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/s10726-011-9266-2?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. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    2. Ray, Thomas G. & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 1998. "Evaluation of rankings with regard to the possible number of agreements and conflicts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 129-136, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Dias, Luis C. & Climaco, Joao N., 2005. "Dealing with imprecise information in group multicriteria decisions: a methodology and a GDSS architecture," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(2), pages 291-307, January.
    5. Ralph L. Keeney, 1976. "A Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 140-145, October.
    6. Ralph L. Keeney & Craig W. Kirkwood, 1975. "Group Decision Making Using Cardinal Social Welfare Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 430-437, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Giuseppe Munda, 2003. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE)," UHE Working papers 2003_04, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    9. Hervé Moulin, 1981. "The Proportional Veto Principle," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(3), pages 407-416.
    10. Kenneth J. Arrow & Herve Raynaud, 1986. "Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511754, April.
    11. Khaled Jabeur & Jean-Marc Martel & Slim Ben Khélifa, 2004. "A Distance-Based Collective Preorder Integrating the Relative Importance of the Group's Members," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 327-349, July.
    12. Utpal Bose & David B. Paradice, 1999. "The Effects of Integrating Cognitive Feedback and Multi-attribute Utility-Based Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods in GDSS," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 157-182, March.
    13. Giuseppe Munda, 2008. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73703-2, February.
    14. Roy, Bernard & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Handling effects of reinforced preference and counter-veto in credibility of outranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 185-190, July.
    15. John De Reuck & Des Klass & Olive Schmidenberg, 2004. "Arbitrage Possibilities in Conflict Situations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 437-448, September.
    16. Luai Hamouda & D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel, 2004. "Strength of Preference in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 449-462, September.
    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. Antonio Jiménez-Martín & Eduardo Gallego & Alfonso Mateos & Juan A. Fernández Pozo, 2017. "Restoring a Radionuclide Contaminated Aquatic Ecosystem: A Group Decision Making Problem with Incomplete Information within MAUT Accounting for Veto," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 653-675, July.
    2. de Almeida Filho, Adiel T. & Clemente, Thárcylla R.N. & Morais, Danielle Costa & de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira, 2018. "Preference modeling experiments with surrogate weighting procedures for the PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 453-461.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Medeiros, C.P. & Alencar, M.H. & de Almeida, A.T., 2017. "Multidimensional risk evaluation of natural gas pipelines based on a multicriteria decision model using visualization tools and statistical tests for global sensitivity analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 268-276.
    6. Roszkowska, Ewa & Wachowicz, Tomasz, 2015. "Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 920-932.
    7. Garcez, Thalles Vitelli & de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira, 2014. "A risk measurement tool for an underground electricity distribution system considering the consequences and uncertainties of manhole events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 68-80.
    8. Ali Azarnivand & Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib, 2017. "A Multi-level Strategic Group Decision Making for Understanding and Analysis of Sustainable Watershed Planning in Response to Environmental Perplexities," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 629-648, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Madson B. S. Monte & Adiel T. Almeida-Filho, 2016. "A Multicriteria Approach Using MAUT to Assist the Maintenance of a Water Supply System Located in a Low-Income Community," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(9), pages 3093-3106, July.

    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. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    2. Antonio Jiménez-Martín & Eduardo Gallego & Alfonso Mateos & Juan A. Fernández Pozo, 2017. "Restoring a Radionuclide Contaminated Aquatic Ecosystem: A Group Decision Making Problem with Incomplete Information within MAUT Accounting for Veto," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 653-675, July.
    3. Martínez, Ricardo & Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquín & Llorca, Natividad, 2022. "Assessments in public procurement procedures," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    4. Alessandro Luè & Alberto Colorni, 2015. "Conflict Analysis for Environmental Impact Assessment: A Case Study of a Transportation System in a Tourist Area," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 613-632, July.
    5. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 337-354, December.
    6. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    7. Cem Iskender Aydin & Gokhan Ozertan & Begum Ozkaynak, 2011. "Should Turkey Adopt GM Crops? A Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for the Case of Cotton Farming in Turkey," Working Papers 2011/07, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    8. 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.
    9. Tommaso Agasisti & Giuseppe Munda & Ralph Hippe, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of European education systems by combining Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple-Criteria Evaluation," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 105-124, June.
    10. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    11. Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos & Plumecocq, Gaël, 2015. "Legitimizing farmers' new knowledge, learning and practices through communicative action: Application of an agro-environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 86-96.
    12. Khaled Jabeur & Jean-Marc Martel, 2010. "An Agreement Index with Respect to a Consensus Preorder," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 571-590, November.
    13. Anna Rita Manca & Peter Benczur & Enrico Giovannini, 2017. "Building a Scientific Narrative Towards a More Resilient EU Society. Part 1: a Conceptual Framework," JRC Research Reports JRC106265, Joint Research Centre.
    14. González-Pachón, Jacinto & Romero, Carlos, 2011. "The design of socially optimal decisions in a consensus scenario," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 179-185, April.
    15. 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.
    16. J González-Pachón & C Romero, 2006. "An analytical framework for aggregating multiattribute utility functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1241-1247, October.
    17. Tommaso Luzzati & Bruno Cheli & S. Arcuri, 2014. "Measuring the sustainability performances of the Italian regions," Discussion Papers 2014/187, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Raffaele Attardi & Alessandro Bonifazi & Carmelo M. Torre, 2012. "Evaluating Sustainability and Democracy in the Development of Industrial Port Cities: Some Italian Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-24, November.
    19. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2018. "Validation of the Innovation Radar assessment framework," JRC Research Reports JRC110926, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.

    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:21:y:2012:i:2:d:10.1007_s10726-011-9266-2. 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.