IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-efficiency analysis of weapon system portfolios


  • Kangaspunta, Jussi
  • Liesiö, Juuso
  • Salo, Ahti


Decisions about the acquisition and maintenance of military equipment serve to build long-term capabilities in preparation of military conflicts. Typically, these decisions involve large investments which need to be supported by adequate cost-efficiency analyses. Yet the cost-efficiency analysis of weapon systems involves several challenges: for example, it is necessary to account for the possible interactions among different weapon systems; the relevance of several impact criteria; and the variety of combat situations in which these systems may be used. In this paper, we develop a portfolio methodology where these challenges are addressed by evaluating the cost-efficiencies of entire portfolios consisting of individual weapon systems. Our methodology accounts for possible interactions among systems by synthesizing impact assessment results that are either generated by combat simulation models or elicited from experts. It also admits incomplete preference information about the relative importance of different impact criteria. This methodology guides decision making by identifying which combinations of weapon systems are efficient with respect to multiple evaluation criteria in different combat situations at different cost levels. It can also be extended to settings where multiple combat situations are addressed simultaneously. The methodology is generic and can therefore be applied also in civilian settings when portfolios of activities (such as mitigation of harmful environmental emissions) may exhibit interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kangaspunta, Jussi & Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti, 2012. "Cost-efficiency analysis of weapon system portfolios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 264-275.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:223:y:2012:i:1:p:264-275 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.042

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Rogerson, William P, 1990. "Quality vs. Quantity in Military Procurement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 83-92, March.
    2. Liesiö, Juuso & Mild, Pekka & Salo, Ahti, 2008. "Robust portfolio modeling with incomplete cost information and project interdependencies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 190(3), pages 679-695, November.
    3. Gregory S. Parnell & Harry W. Conley & Jack A. Jackson & Lee J. Lehmkuhl & John M. Andrew, 1998. "Foundations 2025: A Value Model for Evaluating Future Air and Space Forces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(10), pages 1336-1350, October.
    4. Ahti Salo & Antti Punkka, 2011. "Ranking Intervals and Dominance Relations for Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 200-214, January.
    5. Peter A. Morris, 1977. "Combining Expert Judgments: A Bayesian Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(7), pages 679-693, March.
    6. Keeney, Ralph L., 1996. "Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 537-549, August.
    7. Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti, 2012. "Scenario-based portfolio selection of investment projects with incomplete probability and utility information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(1), pages 162-172.
    8. Salo, Ahti & Punkka, Antti, 2005. "Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 338-356, June.
    9. Kim, Soung Hie & Ahn, Byeong Seok, 1999. "Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 498-507, August.
    10. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    11. Stanley Stafira, Jr. & Gregory S. Parnell & James T. Moore, 1997. "A Methodology for Evaluating Military Systems in a Counterproliferation Role," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(10), pages 1420-1430, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Punkka, Antti & Salo, Ahti, 2013. "Preference Programming with incomplete ordinal information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 141-150.


    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:eee:ejores:v:223:y:2012:i:1:p:264-275. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.