IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/cejnor/v19y2011i4p391-413.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficient generation of alternative perspectives in public environmental policy formulation: applying co-evolutionary simulation–optimization to municipal solid waste management

Author

Listed:
  • Julian Yeomans

Abstract

In public policy formulation, it is generally preferable to create several quantifiably good alternatives that provide very different approaches to the particular situation. This is because public sector decision-making typically involves complex problems that are riddled with incompatible performance objectives and possess competing design requirements which are very difficult—if not impossible—to quantify and capture at the time supporting decision models are constructed. There are invariably unmodelled design issues, not apparent at the time of model construction, which can greatly impact the acceptability of the model’s solutions. Furthermore, public environmental policy formulation problems often contain considerable stochastic uncertainty and there are frequently numerous stakeholders with irreconcilable perspectives involved. Consequently, it is preferable to generate several alternatives that provide multiple, disparate perspectives to the problem. These alternatives should possess near-optimal objective measures with respect to the known modelled objective(s), but be fundamentally different from each other in terms of the system structures characterized by their decision variables. By generating a set of very different solutions, it is hoped that some of these dissimilar alternatives can provide very different perspectives that may serve to satisfy the unmodelled objectives. This study provides a co-evolutionary simulation–optimization modelling-to-generate-alternatives approach that can be used to efficiently create multiple solution alternatives that satisfy required system performance criteria in highly uncertain environments and yet are maximally different in their decision space. This new stochastic approach is very computationally efficient, since it permits the simultaneous generation of good solution alternatives in a single computational run of the SO algorithm. The efficacy and efficiency of this technique is specifically demonstrated using an earlier waste management case to enable direct comparisons to previous methods. Waste management systems provide an ideal setting for illustrating the modelling techniques used for such public environmental policy formulation, since they possess all of the prevalent incongruencies and system uncertainties inherent in complex planning processes. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Julian Yeomans, 2011. "Efficient generation of alternative perspectives in public environmental policy formulation: applying co-evolutionary simulation–optimization to municipal solid waste management," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 19(4), pages 391-413, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:cejnor:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:391-413
    DOI: 10.1007/s10100-011-0190-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10100-011-0190-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10100-011-0190-y?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. J S Yeomans, 2002. "Automatic generation of efficient policy alternatives via simulation-optimization," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(11), pages 1256-1267, November.
    2. James P. Kelly, 2002. "Simulation Optimization is Evolving," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 223-225, August.
    3. Rubenstein-Montano, Bonnie & Anandalingam, G. & Zandi, Iraj, 2000. "A genetic algorithm approach to policy design for consequence minimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 43-54, July.
    4. Yeomans, Julian Scott, 2007. "Solid waste planning under uncertainty using evolutionary simulation-optimization," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 38-60, March.
    5. Azadivar, Farhad & Tompkins, George, 1999. "Simulation optimization with qualitative variables and structural model changes: A genetic algorithm approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 169-182, February.
    6. William G. Ferrell & Haluk Hizlan, 1997. "South Carolina Counties Use a Mixed-Integer Programming-Based Decision Support Tool for Planning Municipal Solid Waste Management," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 23-34, August.
    7. Baetz, Brian W. & Pas, Eric I. & Neebe, Alan W., 1990. "Generating alternative solutions for dynamic programming-based planning problems," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 27-34.
    8. Jon C. Liebman, 1976. "Some Simple-Minded Observations on the Role of Optimization in Public Systems Decision-Making," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 102-108, August.
    9. Warren E. Walker, 1976. "A Heuristic Adjacent Extreme Point Algorithm for the Fixed Charge Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 587-596, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yeomans, Julian Scott, 2007. "Solid waste planning under uncertainty using evolutionary simulation-optimization," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 38-60, March.
    2. P Compagnoni, 1986. "An Environmental Planning Method for Australian Jurisdictions? Comments on the SIRO-PLAN/LUPLAN Schema," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 13(3), pages 335-344, September.
    3. S-Y Chang & S-L Liaw, 1984. "Evaluation of Methods for Generating Alternatives to Regional Wastewater Treatment Systems," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 11(3), pages 325-337, September.
    4. Badri, Masood A., 1999. "Combining the analytic hierarchy process and goal programming for global facility location-allocation problem," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 237-248, September.
    5. Sun, Minghe & Aronson, Jay E. & McKeown, Patrick G. & Drinka, Dennis, 1998. "A tabu search heuristic procedure for the fixed charge transportation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(2-3), pages 441-456, April.
    6. Kleijnen, J.P.C. & van Beers, W.C.M. & van Nieuwenhuyse, I., 2008. "Constrained Optimization in Simulation : A Novel Approach," Discussion Paper 2008-95, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    7. Cansu Kandemir & Holly A. H. Handley, 2019. "Work process improvement through simulation optimization of task assignment and mental workload," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 389-427, December.
    8. Mohamed Marzouk & Osama Moselhi, 2002. "Simulation optimization for earthmoving operations using genetic algorithms," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 535-543.
    9. F Altiparmak & I Karaoglan, 2008. "An adaptive tabu-simulated annealing for concave cost transportation problems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 331-341, March.
    10. William L. Hargrove & Josiah M. Heyman, 2020. "A Comprehensive Process for Stakeholder Identification and Engagement in Addressing Wicked Water Resources Problems," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Gambella, Claudio & Maggioni, Francesca & Vigo, Daniele, 2019. "A stochastic programming model for a tactical solid waste management problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(2), pages 684-694.
    12. Aristide Mingozzi & Roberto Roberti, 2018. "An Exact Algorithm for the Fixed Charge Transportation Problem Based on Matching Source and Sink Patterns," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 229-238, March.
    13. M Laguna & J Molina & F Pérez & R Caballero & A G Hernández-Díaz, 2010. "The challenge of optimizing expensive black boxes: a scatter search/rough set theory approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(1), pages 53-67, January.
    14. Jeroen Beliën & Liesje De Boeck & Jonas Van Ackere, 2014. "Municipal Solid Waste Collection and Management Problems: A Literature Review," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 78-102, February.
    15. Adlakha, Veena & Kowalski, Krzysztof & Lev, Benjamin, 2010. "A branching method for the fixed charge transportation problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 393-397, October.
    16. V. Adlakha & K. Kowalski, 2015. "Fractional Polynomial Bounds for the Fixed Charge Problem," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1026-1038, March.
    17. Jonathan D Linton & Julian Scott Yeomans & Reena Yoogalingam, 2002. "Policy Planning Using Genetic Algorithms Combined with Simulation: The Case of Municipal Solid Waste," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 29(5), pages 757-778, October.
    18. Shuming Wang & Tsan Sheng Ng & Manyu Wong, 2016. "Expansion planning for waste‐to‐energy systems using waste forecast prediction sets," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(1), pages 47-70, February.
    19. Yang, Taho & Kuo, Yiyo & Cho, Chiwoon, 2007. "A genetic algorithms simulation approach for the multi-attribute combinatorial dispatching decision problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1859-1873, February.
    20. S R Kshirsagar & E D Brill Jr, 1984. "Ideation and Evaluation Methods Applied to Land-Use Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 11(3), pages 313-324, September.

    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:cejnor:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:391-413. 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.