IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/isochp/978-1-4939-3094-4_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Paradigms and Challenges

In: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Bernard Roy

    (LAMSADE, Université Paris-Dauphine, Place du Maréchal De Lattre de Tassigny)

Abstract

The purpose of this introductory part is to present an overall view of what MCDA is today. In Sect. 2.1, I will attempt to bring answers to questions such as: what is it reasonable to expect from MCDA? Why decision aiding is more often multicriteria than monocriterion? What are the main limitations to objectivity? Sect. 2.2 will be devoted to a presentation of the conceptual architecture that constitutes the main keys for analyzing and structuring problem situations. Decision aiding cannot and must not be envisaged jointly with a hypothesis of perfect knowledge. Different ways for apprehending the various sources of imperfect knowledge will be introduced in Sect. 2.3. A robustness analysis is necessary in most cases. The crucial question of how can we take into account all criteria comprehensively in order to compare potential actions between them will be tackled in Sect. 2.4. In this introductory part, I will only present a general framework for positioning the main operational approaches that exist today. In Sect. 2.5, I will discuss some more philosophical aspects of MCDA. For providing some aid in a decision context, we have to choose among different paths which one seems to be the most appropriate, or how to combine some of them: the path of realism which leads to the quest for a discussion for discovering, the axiomatic path which is often associated with the quest of norms for prescribing, or the path of constructivism which goes hand in hand with the quest of working hypothesis for recommending.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernard Roy, 2016. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 19-39, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:isochp:978-1-4939-3094-4_2
    DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_2
    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. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    2. 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).
    3. Luís Valadares Tavares & Pedro Arruda, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Model to Evaluate Public Services Contracts," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(3), pages 1-85, March.
    4. Arie Taal & Marc X. Makkes & Marijke Kaat & Paola Grosso, 2019. "A multiple attribute relative quality measure based on the harmonic and arithmetic mean," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 117-134, March.
    5. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    6. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Inter-Criteria Dependencies-Based Decision Support in the Sustainable wind Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Jônatas Augusto Manzolli & André Oliveira & Miguel de Castro Neto, 2021. "Evaluating Walkability through a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach: A Lisbon Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Baumann, Manuel & Weil, Marcel & Peters, Jens F. & Chibeles-Martins, Nelson & Moniz, Antonio B., 2019. "A review of multi-criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy storage systems for grid applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 516-534.
    9. Dinis, Duarte Caldeira & Figueira, José Rui & Teixeira, Ângelo Palos, 2023. "A multiple criteria approach for ship risk classification: An alternative to the Paris MoU Ship Risk Profile," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2019. "A review of cost–benefit analysis and multicriteria decision analysis from the perspective of sustainable transport in project evaluation," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 327-358, November.
    11. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    12. Lorenz Kammermann & Karin Ingold, 2019. "Going beyond technocratic and democratic principles: stakeholder acceptance of instruments in Swiss energy policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 43-65, March.

    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:isochp:978-1-4939-3094-4_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.

    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: 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.