IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/ecothe/v54y2016i2p261-280n5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determination of Expert Group Preferences in the Multi-Criteria Model for the Analysis of Local Economic Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Stanković Jelena
  • Popović Žarko

    (University of Nis, Faculty of Economics, Republic of Serbia)

  • Kostevski Sanja

    (PhD student of Belgrade Banking Academy, Belgrade)

Abstract

Local economic environment is characterised by a range of economic, social, political and demographic parameters, based on which we can perform its analysis. Heterogeneity of relevant characteristics of the local economic environment imposes multiple criteria analysis as one of the suitable tools for the evaluation. Assessment of local economic environment often falls within the scope of group decision-making, as it is usually performed on the basis of an analysis of preferences of economic subjects or relevant experts on the issue of the economic environment at the local level. Regardless of whether it is based on economic subjects or expert group, in order to form a multi-criteria model, it is necessary to generate preferences of individuals into a single weight coefficient, which shows groups’ preference on the importance of each criterion. The subject of this paper is determination of weight coefficients in the multi-criteria model for the analysis of local economic development based on the preferences from a group of experts, by applying adequate statistical tools, and then by ranking local governments according to the quality of business environment perceived by the expert group.In addition to descriptive statistics and testing the significance of differences, in the paper is applied multi-criteria method Simple Additive Weights - SAW.

Suggested Citation

  • Stanković Jelena & Popović Žarko & Kostevski Sanja, 2016. "Determination of Expert Group Preferences in the Multi-Criteria Model for the Analysis of Local Economic Environment," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 54(2), pages 261-280, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:ecothe:v:54:y:2016:i:2:p:261-280:n:5
    DOI: 10.1515/ethemes-2016-0013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ethemes-2016-0013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ethemes-2016-0013?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luis C. Dias & Paula Sarabando, 2012. "A Note on a Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 231-237, September.
    2. Jyrki Wallenius & James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Stanley Zionts & Kalyanmoy Deb, 2008. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1336-1349, July.
    3. Frada Burstein & Clyde Holsapple, 2008. "Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1," International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-48713-5, November.
    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. Yucheng Dong & Yao Li & Ying He & Xia Chen, 2021. "Preference–Approval Structures in Group Decision Making: Axiomatic Distance and Aggregation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 273-295, December.
    2. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Stefanie Schinke & Ralf H. Kaspar, 2016. "Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 421-457, March.
    3. Ainhoa Gonzalez & Álvaro Enríquez-de-Salamanca, 2018. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis in Environmental Assessment: A Review and Reflection on Benefits and Limitations," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-24, September.
    4. Shuang Yao & Donghua Yu & Yan Song & Hao Yao & Yuzhen Hu & Benhai Guo, 2018. "Dry Bulk Carrier Investment Selection through a Dual Group Decision Fusing Mechanism in the Green Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    5. Samek, Anya & Hur, Inkyoung & Kim, Sung-Hee & Yi, Ji Soo, 2016. "An experimental study of the decision process with interactive technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 20-32.
    6. Tyrychtr, J., 2017. "Analytical System with Decision Tree for Economic Benefit," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 9(4).
    7. David E. Allen & Michael McAleer & Abhay K. Singh, 2016. "A Multi-Criteria Portfolio Analysis of Hedge Fund Strategies," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2017-03, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
    8. Junyi Chai & Zhiquan Weng & Wenbin Liu, 2021. "Behavioral Decision Making in Normative and Descriptive Views: A Critical Review of Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Ünsal Özdilek, 2020. "Land and building separation based on Shapley values," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Guo, Mengzhuo & Zhang, Qingpeng & Liao, Xiuwu & Chen, Frank Youhua & Zeng, Daniel Dajun, 2021. "A hybrid machine learning framework for analyzing human decision-making through learning preferences," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Dimitris Bertsimas & Allison O'Hair, 2013. "Learning Preferences Under Noise and Loss Aversion: An Optimization Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1190-1199, October.
    12. Michele Griessmair & Johannes Gettinger, 2020. "Take the Right Turn: The Role of Social Signals and Action–Reaction Sequences in Enacting Turning Points in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 425-459, June.
    13. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    14. Yoichiro Fujii & Hajime Murakami & Yutaka Nakamura & Kazuhisa Takemura, 2023. "Multiattribute regret: theory and experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(4), pages 623-662, November.
    15. Marta Sybis & Emilia Konował & Krystyna Prochaska, 2022. "Dextrins as Green and Biodegradable Modifiers of Physicochemical Properties of Cement Composites," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Marta Kadłubek & Eleftherios Thalassinos & Joanna Domagała & Sandra Grabowska & Sebastian Saniuk, 2022. "Intelligent Transportation System Applications and Logistics Resources for Logistics Customer Service in Road Freight Transport Enterprises," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-27, June.
    17. Hu, Qiwei & Chakhar, Salem & Siraj, Sajid & Labib, Ashraf, 2017. "Spare parts classification in industrial manufacturing using the dominance-based rough set approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1136-1163.
    18. Hamed M. Zolbanin & Dursun Delen & Durand Crosby & David Wright, 2020. "A Predictive Analytics-Based Decision Support System for Drug Courts," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1323-1342, December.
    19. Olivier Cailloux & Tommi Tervonen & Boris Verhaegen & François Picalausa, 2014. "A data model for algorithmic multiple criteria decision analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 77-94, June.
    20. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.

    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:vrs:ecothe:v:54:y:2016:i:2:p:261-280:n:5. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.