MCDM'11 - paper no. 5


 

Back to MCDM'11 contents
 

ON THE CHOICE OF METHOD IN MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION AIDING PROCESS CONCERNING EUROPEAN PROJECTS

Dorota Górecka

Abstract:

In this paper the problem of selecting the most appropriate multi-criteria decision aiding method for a particular application is considered. It is illustrated by a real-life example concerning applications for project co-financing by the European Union. Making a proper decision on which method to choose is difficult because of the great diversity of MCDA techniques proposed so far within the literature. Thus the systematic analysis of their assumptions and properties is required. The paper presents the main strengths and weaknesses of particular decision aiding tools applicable to the problem of ordering European projects as well as chosen procedures aiming at facilitating the process of selecting an appropriate one. Moreover, an extension of EXPROM II by stochastic dominance rules is proposed.

Keywords:

Multi-criteria decision aiding methods, model choice algorithm, model selection process, EXPROM II with stochastic dominances.

Reference index:

Dorota Górecka, (2011), ON THE CHOICE OF METHOD IN MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION AIDING PROCESS CONCERNING EUROPEAN PROJECTS, Multiple Criteria Decision Making (6), pp. 81-103

Full text:

download

Scopus citations in 8 paper(s):
  1. Chojnacka, E., & Górecka, D. (2018). Ranking charities using multi actor multi criteria analysis methodology: The case of public benefit organizations in poland. Decision-making for sustainable transport and mobility: Multi actor multi criteria analysis (pp. 211-231)
  2. Górecka, D. (2017). Using bipolar mix in the process of selecting projects applying for co-financing from the european union. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Operational Research, SOR 2017, , 2017-September 174-179
  3. Górecka, D., & Chojnacka, E. (2017). Organizations of public benefit: Performance evaluation using MCDA approach. Croatian Operational Research Review, 8(2), 613-629. doi:10.17535/crorr.2017.0040
  4. Palha, R. P., Zarate, P., de Almeida, A. T., & Nurmi, H. (2017). Choosing a voting procedure for the GDSS GRUS doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63546-0_12
  5. Roszkowska, E., & Wachowicz, T. (2019). Cognitive style and the expectations towards the preference representation in decision support systems doi:10.1007/978-3-030-21711-2_13
  6. Shevchenko, G., Ustinovichius, L., & Walasek, D. (2019). The evaluation of the contractor's risk in implementing the investment projects in construction by using the verbal analysis methods. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(9) doi:10.3390/su11092660
  7. Trzaskalik, T., Sitarz, S., & Dominiak, C. (2019, 3). Bipolar method and its modifications. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 27, 625-651. doi:10.1007/s10100-019-00615-2
  8. Wojewnik-Filipkowska, A. (2017). Rationalisation of investment decisions in the sustainable management of urban development - is a new paradigm needed? [Racjonalizacja decyzji inwestycyjnych w zrównoważonym zarządzaniu rozwojem miast-czy jest potrzebny nowy paradygmat?] Problemy Ekorozwoju, 12(1), 79-90