IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Valuation for Sustainable Development: The Role of Multicriteria Evaluation

Listed author(s):
  • Sigrid Stagl
Registered author(s):

    Multicriteria methods were found to be useful tools to support decision-making about complex situations - such as those concerned with sustainable development issues - and to deal with conflicts in a structured and transparent way. Increasingly multicriteria evaluation (MCE) is also seen as a constructive response to the critique of cost-benefit analysis. MCE enables decision-makers to take multiple dimensions of impacts of the considered projects into account without the need for full monetarisation. A great number of multicriteria algorithms are now available. The algorithms differ in fundamental ways. Besides the algorithms also the implementation of the valuation technique is important for the outcome. In order to address issues like uncertainty, multiple legitimate perspectives and the need for learning during the decision process, ecological economists apply MCE mostly by combining the analytical tool with participatory techniques. Multikriterienmethoden erweisen sich als nützlich, um die Entscheidungsfindung in komplexen Situationen - wie solche eine nachhaltige Entwicklung betreffend - zu unterstützen und um mit Konflikten in einer strukturierten und transparenten Art umzugehen. Zunehmend wird multikriterielle Bewertung auch als konstruktive Antwort aufdie Kritik der Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse gesehen. Die multikriterielle Bewertung ermöglicht es EntscheidungsträgerInnen, die verschiedenen Dimensionen der Auswirkungen der zur Auswahl stehenden Projekte zu berücksichtigen, ohne diese gänzlich monetarisieren zu müssen. Eine Vielzahl von grundlegend verschiedenen mathematischen Algorithmen für die multikriterielle Bewertung steht zur Verfügung. Außer dem Algorithmus beeinflusst auch die Implementierung der Bewertungsmethode das Ergebnis. Um Probleme wie Unsicherheit, unterschiedliche legitime Problemsichtweisen und die Notwendigkeit von Lernen während des Entscheidungsprozesses zu adressieren, setzen ökologische ÖkonomInnen multikriterielle Bewertung vor allem in Kombination mit partizipativen Methoden ein.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research in its journal Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung.

    Volume (Year): 73 (2004)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 53-62

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:73-10-4
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin

    Phone: xx49-30-89789-0
    Fax: xx49-30-89789-200
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Dan Bloomfield & Kevin Collins & Charlotte Fry & Richard Munton, 2001. "Deliberation and inclusion: vehicles for increasing trust in UK public governance?," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 19(4), pages 501-513, August.
    2. Pollak, Robert A, 1978. "Endogenous Tastes in Demand and Welfare Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 374-379, May.
    3. Samuel Bowles, 1998. "Endogenous Preferences: The Cultural Consequences of Markets and Other Economic Institutions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 75-111, March.
    4. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2002. "Darwinism in economics: from analogy to ontology," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 259-281.
    5. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    6. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Martinez-Alier, Joan & Munda, Giuseppe & O'Neill, John, 1998. "Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 277-286, September.
    8. von Weizsacker, Carl Christian, 1971. "Notes on endogenous change of tastes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 345-372, December.
    9. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    10. O'Connor, Martin, 2000. "Pathways for environmental evaluation: a walk in the (Hanging) Gardens of Babylon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 175-193, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:73-10-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.