IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v26y2017i3d10.1007_s10726-016-9501-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supporting Multicriteria Group Decisions with MACBETH Tools: Selection of Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Actions

Author

Listed:
  • Ricardo J. G. Mateus

    (Universidade de Lisboa)

  • João C. Bana e Costa

    (BANA Consulting, Lda)

  • Pedro Verga Matos

    (Universidade de Lisboa)

Abstract

Decisions on sustainable development issues usually involve multiple stakeholders with multiple and often conflicting perspectives. Participatory processes along with sound multicriteria analysis tools and models for cooperative group decision-making can support stakeholders to select the best actions. This article presents a real-world application of the MACBETH socio-technical approach for the sustainable redevelopment of a brownfield. The project is aimed at presenting a visible and high-profile participation process that could trigger a domino effect for other mine brownfield redevelopment projects to follow in Portugal. A group of key stakeholders was chosen to represent the main evaluation perspectives of the decision context. Structuring the problem was carried out during a decision conference. As it was not possible to apply a full decision conferencing procedure, we conducted at distance a novel participatory process supported by several decision support tools (M-MACBETH, MACBETH Voting, and Web-MACBETH) to evaluate and select the actions under a weak sustainability assumption. Two alternative multicriteria aggregation schemes were applied in order to assist the group in evaluating the added value and doability of the proposed actions. New measures and methods to analyze the dominance relationships between the actions were proposed, further assisting the group in the priority selection of the most effective and doable sustainable actions. Ex-post evaluations of the proposed approach identified its associated benefits and shortcomings. By-products of the research include case study evidences suggesting that decision conferencing yields more aligned evaluations than a nominal group process, and that each brownfield redevelopment action is typically assessed as having consequences across multiple sustainability criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo J. G. Mateus & João C. Bana e Costa & Pedro Verga Matos, 2017. "Supporting Multicriteria Group Decisions with MACBETH Tools: Selection of Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Actions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 495-521, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:26:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-016-9501-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-016-9501-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-016-9501-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-016-9501-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. Bezalel Gavish & John Gerdes, 1997. "Voting mechanisms and their implications in a GDSS environment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 71(0), pages 41-74, January.
    2. Bose, Utpal & Davey, Anne M. & Olson, David L., 1997. "Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-706, December.
    3. Karsu, Özlem & Morton, Alec, 2014. "Incorporating balance concerns in resource allocation decisions: A bi-criteria modelling approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 70-82.
    4. White, Leroy & Bourne, Humphrey, 2007. "Voices and values: Linking values with participation in OR/MS in public policy making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 588-603, October.
    5. De Brucker, Klaas & Macharis, Cathy & Verbeke, Alain, 2013. "Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 122-131.
    6. Scott A. Shane & Karl T. Ulrich, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 133-144, February.
    7. Carlos A. Bana e Costa & João Carlos Lourenço & Mónica Duarte Oliveira & João C. Bana e Costa, 2014. "A Socio-technical Approach for Group Decision Support in Public Strategic Planning: The Pernambuco PPA Case," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 5-29, January.
    8. Graefe, Andreas & Armstrong, J. Scott & Jones, Randall J. & Cuzán, Alfred G., 2014. "Combining forecasts: An application to elections," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-54.
    9. Ralph L. Keeney & Craig W. Kirkwood, 1975. "Group Decision Making Using Cardinal Social Welfare Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 430-437, December.
    10. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    11. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    12. Kunsch, P.L. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Rauschmayer, F., 2009. "Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1100-1108, December.
    13. Sandra Alker & Victoria Joy & Peter Roberts & Nathan Smith, 2000. "The Definition of Brownfield," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 49-69.
    14. Ronald A. Howard, 1980. "An Assessment of Decision Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 4-27, February.
    15. Noel Bryson, 1997. "Supporting consensus formation in Group Support Systems using the Qualitative Discriminant Process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 71(0), pages 75-91, January.
    16. Dias, Luis C. & Climaco, Joao N., 2005. "Dealing with imprecise information in group multicriteria decisions: a methodology and a GDSS architecture," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(2), pages 291-307, January.
    17. Martin S. Schilling & Nadine Oeser & Cornelius Schaub, 2007. "How Effective Are Decision Analyses? Assessing Decision Process and Group Alignment Effects," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 227-242, December.
    18. Efraim Turban & Ting-Peng Liang & Shelly P. J. Wu, 2011. "A Framework for Adopting Collaboration 2.0 Tools for Virtual Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 137-154, March.
    19. Eeva Vilkkumaa & Ahti Salo & Juuso Liesiö, 2014. "Multicriteria Portfolio Modeling for the Development of Shared Action Agendas," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 49-70, January.
    20. Le Menestrel, Marc & Van Wassenhove, Luk N., 2009. "Ethics in Operations Research and Management Sciences: A never-ending effort to combine rigor and passion," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1039-1043, December.
    21. Lizhong Wang & Liping Fang & Keith W. Hipel, 2011. "Negotiation over Costs and Benefits in Brownfield Redevelopment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 509-524, July.
    22. Ralph L. Keeney, 2013. "Foundations for Group Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 103-120, June.
    23. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann, 2001. "Group Decision and Negotiation in Strategy Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 119-140, March.
    24. Ramiro Sanchez-Lopez & Carlos Bana e Costa & Bernard Baets, 2012. "The MACBETH approach for multi-criteria evaluation of development projects on cross-cutting issues," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 199(1), pages 393-408, October.
    25. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D., 2012. "A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 424-436.
    26. Lesser, Jonathan A., 1990. "Application of stochastic dominance tests to utility resource planning under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 15(11), pages 949-961.
    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. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    2. Marco Bertoni, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Sustainability and Value Assessment in Early PSS Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-27, April.
    3. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Vieira, Ana C.L., 2023. "Desirability–doability group judgment framework for the collaborative multicriteria evaluation of public policies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118192, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    2. Dejana Zlatanović, 2015. "A Holistic Approach To Corporate Social Responsibility As A Prerequisite For Sustainable Development: Empirical Evidence," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 60(207), pages 69-94, September.
    3. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    4. Pape, Tom, 2017. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: concept, measures and application," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Diekmann, Sven, 2013. "Moral mid-level principles in modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 132-138.
    6. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Vieira, Ana C.L. & Freitas, Liliana & Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Bana e Costa, João & Freitas, Ângela & Santana, Paula, 2023. "Collaborative development of composite indices from qualitative value judgements: The EURO-HEALTHY Population Health Index model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 475-492.
    7. Hugo Herrera & Nuno Videira & Hubert P.L.M. Korzilius & Kathya Lorena Cordova‐Pozo & Marleen H.F. McCardle‐Keurentjes, 2022. "Reflecting on factors influencing long‐lasting organisational effects of group model‐building interventions," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(2), pages 190-209, April.
    8. Al-Alawi, Baha M. & Coker, Alexander D., 2018. "Multi-criteria decision support system with negotiation process for vehicle technology selection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 278-296.
    9. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    10. Liviu Jigoria-Oprea & Nicolae Popa, 2017. "Industrial brownfields: An unsolved problem in post-socialist cities. A comparison between two mono industrial cities: ReÅŸiÅ£a (Romania) and PanÄ evo (Serbia)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(12), pages 2719-2738, September.
    11. B Glumac & Q Han & W Schaefer, 2018. "A negotiation decision model for public–private partnerships in brownfield redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(1), pages 145-160, January.
    12. Rakesh K. Sarin & L. Robin Keller, 2013. "From the Editors ---Group Decisions, Preference Elicitation, Experienced Utility, Survival Probabilities, and Portfolio Value of Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 99-102, June.
    13. Naveed Ahmad & Yuming Zhu & Muhammad Ibrahim & Muhammad Waqas & Abdul Waheed, 2018. "Development of a Standard Brownfield Definition, Guidelines, and Evaluation Index System for Brownfield Redevelopment in Developing Countries: The Case of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    14. Suzana de Suzana Dantas Daher & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2012. "The Use of Ranking Veto Concept to Mitigate the Compensatory Effects of Additive Aggregation in Group Decisions on a Water Utility Automation Investment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 185-204, March.
    15. S H Choi & B S Ahn, 2009. "IP-MAGS: an incomplete preference-based multiple attribute group support system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(4), pages 496-505, April.
    16. Huh, Woonghee Tim & Lee, Jaywon & Park, Heesang & Park, Kun Soo, 2019. "The potty parity problem: Towards gender equality at restrooms in business facilities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    17. Jessop, Alan, 2014. "IMP: A decision aid for multiattribute evaluation using imprecise weight estimates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 18-29.
    18. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    19. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    20. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.

    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:grdene:v:26:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-016-9501-y. 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.