IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v190y2011i1p221-23810.1007-s10479-009-0527-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed valuation methods: a combined AHP-GP procedure for individual and group multicriteria agricultural valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Jerónimo Aznar
  • Francisco Guijarro
  • José Moreno-Jiménez

Abstract

This paper introduces a new assessment method classification, in which a third procedure, mixed valuation, is jointly included with the traditional economic and non-economic methodologies. The paper considers a case of multiple actors (from a previous work by the same authors—Aznar et al. (Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 25(2):389–409, 2007 ), in which a new technique for multicriteria agriculture valuation (MAVAM) was proposed. The method is specifically designed for situations in which scarce information about the elements being compared (quantified or not) is available. It works in individual and group decision making contexts and attempts to both obtain and incorporate the objective information associated with the tangible aspects of the problem and the subjective knowledge associated with the human factor into the valuation process. It combines two of the most extended multicriteria decision making techniques: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Goal Programming (GP). The first of these enables tangible and intangible information stemming from known elements to be collected by using pairwise comparisons; the second allows the scarce information available and the personal approach to the valuation to be included in the valuation process. The proposed methodology is illustrated by means of its application to a case of individual and group valuation of an agricultural asset in the La Ribera district, Valencia (Spain). Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Jerónimo Aznar & Francisco Guijarro & José Moreno-Jiménez, 2011. "Mixed valuation methods: a combined AHP-GP procedure for individual and group multicriteria agricultural valuation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 221-238, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:190:y:2011:i:1:p:221-238:10.1007/s10479-009-0527-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-009-0527-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-009-0527-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-009-0527-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper & R. O. Ferguson, 1955. "Optimal Estimation of Executive Compensation by Linear Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 138-151, January.
    3. Badri, Masood A., 2001. "A combined AHP-GP model for quality control systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 27-40, June.
    4. Escobar, M. T. & Aguaron, J. & Moreno-Jimenez, J. M., 2004. "A note on AHP group consistency for the row geometric mean priorization procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 318-322, March.
    5. Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jen S., 2007. "Group decision-making: Head-count versus intensity of preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 22-37, March.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Xu, Z., 2000. "On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 683-687, November.
    8. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    9. J Aznar & F Guijarro, 2007. "Modelling aesthetic variables in the valuation of paintings: an interval goal programming approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(7), pages 957-963, July.
    10. Schniederjans, Marc J & Hoffman, James J & Sirmans, G Stacy, 1995. "Using Goal Programming and the Analytic Hierarchy Process in House Selection," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 167-176, September.
    11. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    12. Linares, Pedro & Romero, Carlos, 2002. "Aggregation of preferences in an environmental economics context: a goal-programming approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 89-95, April.
    13. Aznar, Jeronimo & Guijarro, Francisco, 2007. "Estimating regression parameters with imprecise input data in an appraisal context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1896-1907, February.
    14. María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-jiménez, 2007. "Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 287-301, July.
    15. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Constantin Zopounidis & Michael Doumpos, 2013. "Multicriteria decision systems for financial problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 21(2), pages 241-261, July.
    2. De Marinis, Pietro & Sali, Guido, 2020. "Participatory analytic hierarchy process for resource allocation in agricultural development projects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2016. "The precise consistency consensus matrix in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 245-259, October.
    4. Morano, Pierluigi & Tajani, Francesco, 2018. "Saving soil and financial feasibility. A model to support public-private partnerships in the regeneration of abandoned areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 40-48.
    5. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    6. Mehrdad Mehrbod & Nan Tu & Lixin Miao & Dai Wenjing, 2012. "Interactive fuzzy goal programming for a multi-objective closed-loop logistics network," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 201(1), pages 367-381, December.
    7. Behnam Fooladi Dehaghi & Ali Khoshfetrat, 2020. "Optimal Allocation of Water Reuse Using Modified TODIM-GP Approach with Considering the Leopold Matrix Outputs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(12), pages 3823-3854, September.
    8. Czembrowski, Piotr & Kronenberg, Jakub & Czepkiewicz, Michał, 2016. "Integrating non-monetary and monetary valuation methods – SoftGIS and hedonic pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 166-175.
    9. Francisco Guijarro & Prodromos Tsinaslanidis, 2020. "Analysis of Academic Literature on Environmental Valuation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Ho, William & Ma, Xin, 2018. "The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 399-414.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    2. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2016. "The precise consistency consensus matrix in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 245-259, October.
    3. Jacinto González-Pachón & Carlos Romero, 2007. "Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 123-132, October.
    4. Aznar Bellver, Jerónimo & Guijarro Martínez, Francisco & Moreno Jiménez, José María, 2007. "Valoración Agraria multicriterio en un entorno con escasa información/Multicriteria Agricultural Valuation in an Environment with scarce information," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 549-572, Abril.
    5. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    6. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    7. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Alberto Turón, 2019. "AHP-Group Decision Making Based on Consistency," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, March.
    8. María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-jiménez, 2007. "Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 287-301, July.
    9. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2023. "Reducing incompatibility in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(1), pages 1-26, July.
    10. Changsheng Lin & Gang Kou & Yi Peng & Fawaz E. Alsaadi, 2022. "Aggregation of the nearest consistency matrices with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 179-195, September.
    11. J González-Pachón & C Romero, 2006. "An analytical framework for aggregating multiattribute utility functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1241-1247, October.
    12. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    13. Benítez-Fernández, Amalia & Ruiz, Francisco, 2020. "A Meta-Goal Programming approach to cardinal preferences aggregation in multicriteria problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    14. Cortés-Aldana, Félix Antonio & García-Melón, Mónica & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo & Poveda-Bautista, Rocío, 2009. "University objectives and socioeconomic results: A multicriteria measuring of alignment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 811-822, December.
    15. Alfredo Altuzarra & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2010. "Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1755-1773, December.
    16. Manuel Salvador & Alfredo Altuzarra & Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2015. "A Bayesian Approach to Maximising Inner Compatibility in AHP-Systemic Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 655-673, July.
    17. Roberto Cervelló-Royo & Francisco Guijarro & Victor Martinez-Gomez, 2019. "Social Performance considered within the global performance of Microfinance Institutions: a new approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 737-755, September.
    18. Kreng, Victor B. & Wu, Chao-Yi, 2007. "Evaluation of knowledge portal development tools using a fuzzy AHP approach: The case of Taiwanese stone industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1795-1810, February.
    19. Zorica Srđević & Bojan Srđević & Kosana Suvočarev & Laslo Galamboš, 2020. "Hybrid Constructed Wetland Selection as a Group Decision-Making Problem," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(1), pages 295-310, January.
    20. Pietro Amenta & Alessio Ishizaka & Antonio Lucadamo & Gabriella Marcarelli & Vijay Vyas, 2020. "Computing a common preference vector in a complex multi-actor and multi-group decision system in Analytic Hierarchy Process context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 33-62, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:190:y:2011:i:1:p:221-238:10.1007/s10479-009-0527-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.