Two decision analysis approaches: Choosing a chemical analysis method

Abstract

This article illustrates how two different decision analysis (DA) methods can be used to assist in making environmental remediation decisions. The two DA methods are Multiattribute Utility Theory (MAUT) and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). MAUT and AHP differ greatly in their underlying philosophies. MAUT employs an interval scale and constructs utility functions that quantify the total utility to the decision maker of each technology alternative; AHP employs a ratio scale and uses pairwise comparisons to produce a final ranking of the alternatives that reflects the decision maker's comparative preferences. In this study, the same technology was ranked first by both methods; however, the remaining rankings did not agree. Also, statistical analysis indicated that some score differences may be statistically insignificant. These results are presented and discussed along with a comparison of the features, advantages, and disadvantages of these two DA approaches.

Tradeoffs in Design-to-Budget Projects

“…In the spirit of the MAUT method 1,2,3 , the problem was reformulated as a design and optimization problem: find out which products shall be offered so that the quality of the service is maximized under the constraint that the overall cost remains under a given limit. This is first a design problem in the sense that one searches for a combination of the products to offer.…”