IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-00874383.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Participative design of participation structures: a general approach and some risk management case studies

Author

Listed:
  • Chabane Mazri

    (INERIS - Institut National de l'Environnement Industriel et des Risques)

  • Bruno Debray

    (INERIS - Institut National de l'Environnement Industriel et des Risques)

  • Myriam Merad

    (INERIS - Institut National de l'Environnement Industriel et des Risques)

  • Alexis Tsoukiàs

    (LAMSADE - Laboratoire d'analyse et modélisation de systèmes pour l'aide à la décision - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Organising participation of multiple stakeholders is nowadays a widespread request in decision processes, especially for organisations managing environmental risks. Therefore, analysts delivering decision support are expected to provide decision makers with scientifically sound and practically realisable approaches regarding this issue. One of the main challenges in dealing with participation is the definition of the organisation, the so called participative structure, through which stakeholders will contribute and interact during the decision process. Who should participate when and according to which rules are the main questions to be answered. Stakes associated to this challenge are of extreme importance for decision makers since decision legitimacy and acceptance strongly relies on the ability to demonstrate a real transparency and information disclosure during the whole decision process. This paper proposes the iterative comparison approach as a new and original frame to be used by an analyst supporting a client dealing with such questions. Through an unambiguous definition of cognitive artefacts to be constructed when designing participative structures, this paper provides a clear framework that organises an analyst intervention in participative contexts. Furthermore, it offers the opportunity to design tailored participative structures that integrate context specificities in one hand, and satisfies quality criteria being fairness, competence and efficiency on the other hand.

Suggested Citation

  • Chabane Mazri & Bruno Debray & Myriam Merad & Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2012. "Participative design of participation structures: a general approach and some risk management case studies," Working Papers hal-00874383, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-00874383
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00874383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00874383/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    2. Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2007. "On the concept of decision aiding process: an operational perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 3-27, October.
    3. Roy, Bernard, 1994. "On operational research and decision aid," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 23-26, February.
    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. Giada Marchi & Giulia Lucertini & Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2016. "From evidence-based policy making to policy analytics," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 15-38, January.
    2. Giada Marchi & Giulia Lucertini & Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2016. "From evidence-based policy making to policy analytics," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 15-38, January.

    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. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10610 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sébastien Bigaret & Richard E. Hodgett & Patrick Meyer & Tatiana Mironova & Alexandru-Liviu Olteanu, 2017. "Supporting the multi-criteria decision aiding process: R and the MCDA package," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 5(1), pages 169-194, November.
    3. József Temesi, 2011. "Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker," 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(2), pages 239-249, June.
    4. Timothy W. Simpson & Simon Miller & Elliott B. Tibor & Michael A. Yukish & Gary Stump & Hanumanthrao Kannan & Bryan Mesmer & Eliot H. Winer & Christina L. Bloebaum, 2017. "Adding Value to Trade Space Exploration When Designing Complex Engineered Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 131-146, March.
    5. Sola, Antonio Vanderley Herrero & Mota, Caroline Maria de Miranda & Kovaleski, João Luiz, 2011. "A model for improving energy efficiency in industrial motor system using multicriteria analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3645-3654, June.
    6. Antonio J. Sánchez-Garrido & Ignacio J. Navarro & José García & Víctor Yepes, 2022. "An Adaptive ANP & ELECTRE IS-Based MCDM Model Using Quantitative Variables," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-24, June.
    7. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    8. Pavlos Delias & Vassilios Zoumpoulidis & Ioannis Kazanidis, 2019. "Visualizing and exploring event databases: a methodology to benefit from process analytics," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 887-908, December.
    9. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    10. Saïna Hassanzadeh & Didier Gourc & François Marmier & Sophie Bougaret, 2010. "Decision-making under uncertainty in drug development," Post-Print hal-00745303, HAL.
    11. Leonardo Ensslin & Vinicius Dezem & Ademar Dutra & Sandra Rolim Ensslin & Karine Somensi, 2018. "Seaport-performance tools: an analysis of the international literature," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 20(4), pages 587-602, December.
    12. Bernroider, Edward W.N. & Schmöllerl, Patrick, 2013. "A technological, organisational, and environmental analysis of decision making methodologies and satisfaction in the context of IT induced business transformations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 141-153.
    13. Voyant, Cyril & Muselli, Marc & Paoli, Christophe & Nivet, Marie-Laure, 2013. "Hybrid methodology for hourly global radiation forecasting in Mediterranean area," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1-11.

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-00874383. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.