Book contents
- Theory and Practice in Policy Analysis
- Theory and Practice in Policy Analysis
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Policy Analysis: An Overview
- Part I Making Decisions that Maximize Utility
- 2 Preferences and the Idea of Utility
- 3 Benefit–Cost Analysis
- 4 Decision Analysis
- 5 Valuing Intangibles and Other Non-Market Outcomes
- 6 Multi-Attribute Utility Theory and Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- 7 Preferences over Time and across Space
- Part II Some Widely Used Analysis Tools and Topics
- Part III How Individuals and Organizations Actually Make Decisions
- Part IV The Policy Process and S&T Policy (Mainly) in the United States
- Book part
- Index
- References
6 - Multi-Attribute Utility Theory and Multi-Criteria Decision Making
from Part I - Making Decisions that Maximize Utility
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 August 2017
Book contents
- Theory and Practice in Policy Analysis
- Theory and Practice in Policy Analysis
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Policy Analysis: An Overview
- Part I Making Decisions that Maximize Utility
- 2 Preferences and the Idea of Utility
- 3 Benefit–Cost Analysis
- 4 Decision Analysis
- 5 Valuing Intangibles and Other Non-Market Outcomes
- 6 Multi-Attribute Utility Theory and Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- 7 Preferences over Time and across Space
- Part II Some Widely Used Analysis Tools and Topics
- Part III How Individuals and Organizations Actually Make Decisions
- Part IV The Policy Process and S&T Policy (Mainly) in the United States
- Book part
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Theory and Practice in Policy AnalysisIncluding Applications in Science and Technology, pp. 155 - 184Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Ananda, J. and Herath, G. (2005). “Evaluating Public Risk Preferences in Forest Land-Use Choices Using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory,” Ecological Economics, 55(3), pp. 408–419.Google Scholar
Brans, J.P. (1982). “L’ingénierie de la Décision: Élaboration d’Instruments d’Aide à la Décision, La Méthode PROMETHEE,” in Nadeau, R. and Landry, M. (eds.), L’aide à la Décision: Nature, Instruments et Perspectives d’Avenir, Presses de l’Université Laval, pp. 183–213.Google Scholar
Cohon, J.L. (2003). Multiobjective Programming and Planning, Dover Press (originally published by Academic Press in 1978), 333pp.Google Scholar
Cohon, J. and Rothley, K. (1997). “Multiobjective Methods,” in ReVelle, C. and McGarity, A.E. (eds.), Design and Operation of Civil and Environmental Engineering Systems, Wiley, 752pp.Google Scholar
Connolly, T., Arkes, H.R., and Hammond, K.R. (eds.) (2000). Judgment and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader, Cambridge University Press, 786pp.Google Scholar
Dawes, R.M. (1988). Rational Choice in an Uncertain World, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 346pp.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, R. (2013). “Wine Tasting: It’s Junk Science,” Guardian, June 22. Available at: www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis.Google Scholar
Dyer, J.S. (1990). “Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Management Science, 36(3), pp. 249–258.Google Scholar
Dyer, J.S. (2005). “Chapter 7: MAUT: Multiattribute Utility Theory,” in Figueira, J., Greco, S., and Ehrgott, M. (eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, 78, Springer, pp. 225–295.Google Scholar
Edwards, W. and Newman, J.R. (1982). Multiattribute Evaluation, Sage Publications, 96pp. Reprinted as “Chapter 1: Multiattribute Evaluation,” in Connolly, T., Arkes, H.R., and Hammond, K.R. (eds.), Judgment and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader, Cambridge University Press, pp. 17–34, 2000.Google Scholar
Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., and Figueira, J.R. (eds.) (2016). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, 233, Springer, 1347pp.Google Scholar
Gass, S.I. (2005). “Model World: The Great Debate – MAUT versus AHP,” Interfaces, 35(4), pp. 308–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, R.T. (2008). “An Examination of Judge Reliability at a Major U.S. Wine Competition,” Journal of Wine Economics, 3(2), pp. 105–113.Google Scholar
Keeney, R.L. (1977). “A Utility Function for Examining Policy Affecting Salmon on the Skeena River,” Journal of the Fisheries Board of Canada, 34(1), pp. 49–63.Google Scholar
Keeney, R.L. (1980). “Chapter 7: Evaluating Site Impacts,” in Siting Energy Facilities, Academic Press, 413pp.Google Scholar
Keeney, R.L. (1992). Value Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking, Harvard University Press, 416pp.Google Scholar
Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, Wiley, 569pp.Google Scholar
Keeney, R.L., Renn, O., and von Winterfeldt, D. (1987). “Structuring Germany’s Energy Objectives,” Energy Policy, 13, pp. 352–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koksalan, M., Wallenius, J., and Zionts, S. (2011). Multiple Criteria Decision Making: From Early History to the 21st Century, World Scientific, 197pp.Google Scholar
McDaniels, T.L. (1996). “A Multiattribute Index for Evaluating Environmental Impacts of Electric Utilities,” Journal of Environmental Management, 46, pp. 57–66.Google Scholar
ReVelle, C., Cohon, J.L., and Shobrys, D. (1991). “Simultaneous Siting and Routing in the Disposal of Hazardous Wastes,” Transportation Science, 25(2), pp. 138–145.Google Scholar
Ridgley, M.A. and Rijsberman, F.R. (1992). “Multicriteria Evaluation in a Policy Analysis of a Rhine Estuary,” Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 28(6), pp. 1095–1110.Google Scholar
Roy, B. (1968). “Classement et Choix en Présence de Points de Vue Multiples (La Méthode ELECTRE),” La Revue d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle, 8, pp. 57–75.Google Scholar
Saaty, T.L. (1977). “A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, pp. 234–281.Google Scholar
Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, 287pp.Google Scholar
Saaty, T.L. (1994). “How to Make a Decision: The Analytical Hierarchy Process,” Interfaces, 24(6), pp. 19–43.Google Scholar
Steuer, R. (1986). Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application, Wiley, 546pp.Google Scholar
Tanaka, J.W. and Curran, T. (2001). “A Neural Basis for Expert Object Recognition,” Psychological Science, 12(1), pp. 43–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torrance, G.W., Boyle, M.H., and Horwood, S.P. (1982). “Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to Measure Social Preferences for Health States,” Operations Research, 30(6), pp. 1043–1069.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by