Criteria preprocessing in multi‐actor multi‐criteria analysis

Abstract

Multi‐actor multi‐criteria analysis is a group decision‐making framework that allows multiple stakeholder groups to be involved in the decision‐making process, facilitating the understanding of the points of consensus and conflict among the stakeholder groups. Carefully selecting suitable criteria is important as they illustrate the possibly divergent priorities of the respective stakeholder group, and overlooking important criteria can lead to erroneous outcomes. Furthermore, the number of criteria needs specific consideration, as a too large number poses problems for human cognition, but a too small number inaccurately represents the stakeholder's interest. In stakeholder groups with many members, such as those representing citizens, defining a criteria set is likely to be even more complicated. Currently, there is no formal guideline to assist facilitators in defining these criteria sets. In this paper, we propose a novel framework for criteria preprocessing with stakeholder involvement that includes a guideline for firstly selecting criteria into a tentative list and secondly selecting the final criteria set. It provides a procedure on how to determine criteria considering the priorities of stakeholder groups with regard to the context. As a final step, we propose a mathematical model for selecting a number of criteria that are both cognitively manageable and representative for the participants' priorities. Based on the principles of the Pareto analysis, as well as the cognitive judgment theory “magic number seven plus or minus two”, a recommendation list of the criteria is generated. It prevents key criteria from being omitted while at the same time limiting the overall number of criteria. This framework is applied to a social decision‐making case for construction logistics, and the results are compared with the conventional approach of criteria definition.

MAMCABM: A Data-Driven Stakeholder-Based Decision-Support System that Considers Uncertainties

“…Stakeholders may have varying priorities, which lead to different criteria. To create a comprehensive list, we consulted previous literature and sought advice from experts with a formal procedure [15]. The criteria are listed in Table 3.…”

Robust Stakeholder-Based Group-Decision Making Framework: The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) with the Integration of Best-Worst Method (BWM)

“…One of the most significant advantages of MAMCA is its flexibility, which is reflected in its steps. The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) framework consists of several steps that follow standard Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making (MCGDM) frameworks [21]. However, MAMCA differs in that stakeholders are identified in the second step, so that they may be involved in subsequent steps to aid facilitators for example in identifying criteria [3].…”