IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03193653.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Gino Baudry

    (GEPEA - Laboratoire de génie des procédés - environnement - agroalimentaire - IUT Nantes - Institut Universitaire de Technologie - Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes - UN UFR ST - Université de Nantes - UFR des Sciences et des Techniques - UN - Université de Nantes - IUT Saint-Nazaire - Institut Universitaire de Technologie Saint-Nazaire - UN - Université de Nantes - EPUN - Ecole Polytechnique de l'Université de Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes - ONIRIS - École nationale vétérinaire, agroalimentaire et de l'alimentation Nantes-Atlantique - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UBL - Université Bretagne Loire - IMT Atlantique - IMT Atlantique - IMT - Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris] - IUT La Roche-sur-Yon - Institut Universitaire de Technologie - La Roche-sur-Yon - UN - Université de Nantes, LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - IEMN-IAE Nantes - Institut d'Économie et de Management de Nantes - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes)

  • Cathy Macharis

    (MOBI research group, ETEC Department, Vrije Universiteit Brussel - VUB - Vrije Universiteit Brussel [Bruxelles])

  • Thomas Vallée

    (LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - IEMN-IAE Nantes - Institut d'Économie et de Management de Nantes - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes)

Abstract

Concerns about environmental and social effects have made Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) increasingly popular. Decision making in complex contexts often – possibly always – requires addressing an aggregation of multiple issues to meet social, economic, legal, technical, and environmental objectives. These values at stake may affect different stakeholders through distributional effects characterized by a high and heterogeneous uncertainty that no social actors can completely control or understand. On this basis, we present a new process framework that aims to support participatory decision making under uncertainty: the range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (range-based MAMCA). On the one hand, the process framework explicitly considers stakeholders' objectives at an output level of aggregation. On the other hand, by means of a Monte Carlo analysis, the method also provides an exploratory scenario approach that enables the capture of the uncertainty, which stems from the complex context evolution. Range-based MAMCA offers a unique participatory process framework that enables us (1) to identify the alternatives pros and cons for each stakeholder group; (2) to provide probabilities about the risk of supporting mistaken, or at least ill-suited, decisions because of the uncertainty regarding to the decision-making context; (3) to take the decision-makers' limited control of the actual policy effects over the implementation of one or several options into account. The range-based MAMCA framework is illustrated by means of our first case study that aimed to assess French stakeholders' support for different biofuel options by 2030.

Suggested Citation

  • Gino Baudry & Cathy Macharis & Thomas Vallée, 2018. "Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty," Post-Print hal-03193653, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03193653
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.06.036
    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.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Vincke, 1994. "Recent progresses in Multicriteria Decision-Aid," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/165499, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    3. Michela Nardo & Michaela Saisana & Andrea Saltelli & Stefano Tarantola & Anders Hoffman & Enrico Giovannini, 2005. "Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2005/3, OECD Publishing.
    4. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    5. Awudu, Iddrisu & Zhang, Jun, 2012. "Uncertainties and sustainability concepts in biofuel supply chain management: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 1359-1368.
    6. Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Elena Arce, María & Saavedra, Ángeles & Míguez, José L. & Granada, Enrique, 2015. "The use of grey-based methods in multi-criteria decision analysis for the evaluation of sustainable energy systems: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 924-932.
    9. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2014. "Decision making under uncertainty with unknown utility function and rank-ordered probabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 537-541.
    10. Anthony Halog & Yosef Manik, 2011. "Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-31, February.
    11. Elghali, Lucia & Clift, Roland & Sinclair, Philip & Panoutsou, Calliope & Bauen, Ausilio, 2007. "Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6075-6083, December.
    12. Van Den Honert, R. C. & Lootsma, F. A., 1997. "Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP The model of the group decision process and Pareto optimality," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 363-370, January.
    13. Ralph L. Keeney, 1976. "A Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 140-145, October.
    14. Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 1986. "A multicriteria decision aid methodology to deal with conflicting situations on the weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 22-34, July.
    15. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    16. Turcksin, Laurence & Macharis, Cathy & Lebeau, Kenneth & Boureima, Faycal & Van Mierlo, Joeri & Bram, Svend & De Ruyck, Jacques & Mertens, Lara & Jossart, Jean-Marc & Gorissen, Leen & Pelkmans, Luc, 2011. "A multi-actor multi-criteria framework to assess the stakeholder support for different biofuel options: The case of Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 200-214, January.
    17. Philippe Vincke, 1994. "Recent progresses in Multicriteria Decision-Aid," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 17(2), pages 21-32, September.
    18. 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.
    19. J. P. Brans & Ph. Vincke, 1985. "Note---A Preference Ranking Organisation Method," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 647-656, June.
    20. De Brucker, Klaas & Macharis, Cathy & Verbeke, Alain, 2013. "Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 122-131.
    21. Carmone, Frank J. & Kara, Ali & Zanakis, Stelios H., 1997. "A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 538-553, November.
    22. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    23. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    24. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    25. Heen, Eirik Eriksen & Heen, Knut & Leung, PingSun, 2014. "Conflicting goals in fisheries management—A study of the Norwegian cod fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 73-80.
    26. Breukers, Sylvia & Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2737-2750, May.
    27. Greening, Lorna A. & Bernow, Steve, 2004. "Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 721-735, April.
    28. Robert T. Eckenrode, 1965. "Weighting Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 180-192, November.
    29. Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    30. Mirakyan, Atom & De Guio, Roland, 2015. "Modelling and uncertainties in integrated energy planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 62-69.
    31. Ascough, J.C. & Maier, H.R. & Ravalico, J.K. & Strudley, M.W., 2008. "Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 383-399.
    32. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    33. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    34. Razieh Mosadeghi & Jan Warnken & Rodger Tomlinson & Hamid Mirfenderesk, 2013. "Uncertainty analysis in the application of multi-criteria decision-making methods in Australian strategic environmental decisions," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1097-1124, October.
    35. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    36. Lawrence Phillips & Carlos Bana e Costa, 2007. "Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 51-68, October.
    37. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    38. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Sudipa Choudhury & Apu Kumar Saha & Mrinmoy Majumder, 2020. "Optimal location selection for installation of surface water treatment plant by Gini coefficient-based analytical hierarchy process," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 4073-4099, June.
    2. M. J. Hermoso-Orzáez & J. Garzón-Moreno, 2022. "Risk management methodology in the supply chain: a case study applied," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 313(2), pages 1051-1075, June.
    3. Guohua Qu & Rudan Xue & Tianjiao Li & Weihua Qu & Zeshui Xu, 2020. "A Stochastic Multi-Attribute Method for Measuring Sustainability Performance of a Supplier Based on a Triple Bottom Line Approach in a Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Yang, Zaoli & Ahmad, Salman & Bernardi, Andrea & Shang, Wen-long & Xuan, Jin & Xu, Bing, 2023. "Evaluating alternative low carbon fuel technologies using a stakeholder participation-based q-rung orthopair linguistic multi-criteria framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    5. Licheng Fang & Pangpang Gao & Shuguang Wang & Zhenhao Ma, 2023. "Coupling Fuzzy Bi-Level Chance Constraint Programming and Spatial Analysis for Urban Ecological Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, April.
    6. d’Amore-Domenech, Rafael & Santiago, Óscar & Leo, Teresa J., 2020. "Multicriteria analysis of seawater electrolysis technologies for green hydrogen production at sea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    7. Amin Vafadarnikjoo & Madjid Tavana & Tiago Botelho & Konstantinos Chalvatzis, 2020. "A neutrosophic enhanced best–worst method for considering decision-makers’ confidence in the best and worst criteria," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 289(2), pages 391-418, June.
    8. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    9. Melkonyan, Ani & Gruchmann, Tim & Lohmar, Fabian & Kamath, Vasanth & Spinler, Stefan, 2020. "Sustainability assessment of last-mile logistics and distribution strategies: The case of local food networks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    10. Espada, Ana Luiza Violato & Kainer, Karen A., 2024. "Decision making processes and power dynamics in timber production co-management: A comparative analysis of seven Brazilian Amazonian community-based projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    11. Ahmad, Salman & Ouenniche, Jamal & Kolosz, Ben W. & Greening, Philip & Andresen, John M. & Maroto-Valer, M. Mercedes & Xu, Bing, 2021. "A stakeholders’ participatory approach to multi-criteria assessment of sustainable aviation fuels production pathways," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    12. de Castro-Pardo, Mónica & Pérez-Rodríguez, Fernando & Martín-Martín, José María & Azevedo, João C., 2019. "Modelling stakeholders’ preferences to pinpoint conflicts in the planning of transboundary protected areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    13. Agathe Osinski, 2021. "Towards a Critical Sustainability Science? Participation of Disadvantaged Actors and Power Relations in Transdisciplinary Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Bekius, Femke & Gomes, Sharlene L., 2023. "A framework to design game theory-based interventions for strategic analysis of real-world problems with stakeholders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(2), pages 925-938.
    15. Puthearath Chan & Myeong-Hun Lee, 2019. "Developing Sustainable City Indicators for Cambodia through Delphi Processes of Panel Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-32, June.
    16. Colin Williams & Liping Fang, 2019. "A Value-Focused Multiple Participant-Multiple Criteria (MPMC) Decision Support Approach for Public Policy Formulation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 99-126, February.
    17. Maria Rosaria Guarini & Fabrizio Battisti & Anthea Chiovitti, 2018. "A Methodology for the Selection of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods in Real Estate and Land Management Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-28, February.
    18. Rodríguez Sousa, A.A. & Parra-López, C. & Sayadi-Gmada, S. & Barandica, J.M. & Rescia, A.J., 2020. "A multifunctional assessment of integrated and ecological farming in olive agroecosystems in southwestern Spain using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.

    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. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    2. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    3. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    5. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    6. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    8. 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.
    9. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    10. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    11. Indre Siksnelyte & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Deepak Sharma, 2018. "An Overview of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Dealing with Sustainable Energy Development Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Stefanos Xenarios & Heracles Polatidis, 2015. "Alleviating climate change impacts in rural Bangladesh: a PROMETHEE outranking-based approach for prioritizing agricultural interventions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 963-985, October.
    13. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    14. Bortoluzzi, Mirian & Correia de Souza, Celso & Furlan, Marcelo, 2021. "Bibliometric analysis of renewable energy types using key performance indicators and multicriteria decision models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    15. Maria Rosaria Guarini & Fabrizio Battisti & Anthea Chiovitti, 2018. "A Methodology for the Selection of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods in Real Estate and Land Management Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-28, February.
    16. Marinakis, Vangelis & Doukas, Haris & Xidonas, Panos & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2017. "Multicriteria decision support in local energy planning: An evaluation of alternative scenarios for the Sustainable Energy Action Plan," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-16.
    17. te Boveldt, Geert & Van Raemdonck, Koen & Macharis, Cathy, 2018. "A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 30-39.
    18. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Participatory selection of sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 92-102.
    19. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    20. Levi Vermote & Cathy Macharis & Koen Putman, 2013. "A Road Network for Freight Transport in Flanders: Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Assessment of Alternative Ring Ways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(10), pages 1-25, September.

    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:hal:journl:hal-03193653. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.