Advertisement

Multicriteria Output Integration Analysis

  • Pierre Andre Haldi
  • Jacques Pictet
Chapter
Part of the Alliance for Global Sustainability Bookseries book series (AGSB, volume 4)

Abstract

CETP’s relationship with the Alliance for Global Sustainability (AGS) implies that sustainability is a basic concern of the project’s scenarios assessment process. Because sustainability is by nature a multidimensional concept, it requires the use of methodological approaches specifically designed to tackle decision-making problems of this type. Such a methodology should encompass multiple criteria, including economic, social and environmental issues, under sustainability constraints, and produce results that are transparent and easy for different stakeholders to understand.

Keywords

Strict Preference Multicriteria Analysis Decision Scenario Credibility Index Discordance Index 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Belton V., Pictet J. (1997) A Framework for Group Decision Using a MCDA Model, Journal of Decision Systems 6 (3).Google Scholar
  2. Brundtland, G.H. (1989) Global Change and our Common Future, Benjamin Franklin Lecture, Environment, Vol. 31, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  3. Haldi, P.-A. et al. (2002) Multi-criteria/multi-stakeholders comparative assessment of electricity generation scenarios in the sustainability context: a Swiss case study, International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, Nos.1/2, Published by Interscience Enterprises Ltd., Oxford.Google Scholar
  4. Maystre L.Y., Pictet J., Simos J. (1994) Méthodes multicritéres Electre: description, conseils pratiques et cas d’application à la gestion environnementale, Presse polytechniques et universitaires romandes, Lausanne.Google Scholar
  5. Pictet J, and Belton V. (2000) ACIDE: Analyse de la compensation et de l’incomparabilité dans la décision, in AMCD - Aide multicritére à la décision (Multiple criteria decision aiding), edited by Colorni A., Paruccini M. and Roy B., Joint research centre, EUR report 19808 EN, The European Commission.Google Scholar
  6. Pictet J., Maystre L.Y. and Simos J. (1994) Surmesure. An instrument for presentation of results obtained by methods of the Electre and Promethee families, in Applying multiple criteria aid for decision to environmental management, edited by Paruccini M., Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  7. Roy B. (1978) Electre III: Un algorithme de classement fondé sur une représentation floue des préférences en présence de critéres multiples, Cahiers du CERO 20.Google Scholar
  8. Roy B. (1985) Méthodologie multicritére d’aide à la décision, Economica, collection « Gestion », Paris (English version : Roy B. (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding, Kluwer, Dordrecht).Google Scholar
  9. Roy B. and Bouyssou D. (1993) Aide multicritére d’aide à la décision : Méthodes et cas, Economica, collection « Gestion », Paris.Google Scholar
  10. Schärlig A. (1985) Décider sur plusieurs critéres. Panorama de l’aide à la décision multicritére, Presses Polytechniques Romandes, Lausanne.Google Scholar
  11. SESAMS (2000) Strategic Electric Sector Assessment Methodology Under Sustainability Conditions, Final Research Report for the AGS SESAMS Project 1988-1999, MIT, Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology.Google Scholar
  12. UNDP (2000) World Energy Assessment, United Nations Development Program, Bureau for Development Policy, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Zaddeh L. (1978) Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Andre Haldi
  • Jacques Pictet

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations