IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v260y2017i2p706-714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Project rankings for participatory budget based on the fuzzy TOPSIS method

Author

Listed:
  • Walczak, Dariusz
  • Rutkowska, Aleksandra

Abstract

In this study, a fuzzy technique is proposed for order preference based on the similarity to an ideal solution for the personalized ranking of projects in a participatory budget (PB). A PB is a group decision-making process where citizens distribute public resources among a set of city investment proposals. The dynamic growth in the popularity of PB during the last 10 years has been due to a significant increase in the number of projects submitted and the demonstrable weakness of the traditional majority vote. The rationality of decision-makers is restricted by the large number of possible options from which voters can choose only a few within a limited amount of time, and thus there is no opportunity to review all of the projects. Appropriate decision support tools can assist with the selection of the best outcome and help to address the growth of PB processes. The ranking of PB projects is a specific problem because multi-criteria comparisons are based on non-quantitative criteria, i.e., nominal and fuzzy criteria. The “Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution” (TOPSIS) method aims to minimize the distance to the ideal alternative while maximizing the distance to the worst. In a fuzzy extension of TOPSIS, the ratings of alternatives and the weights of the criteria are fuzzy numbers or linguistic variables. The major modification required to the TOPSIS method for PB is that the perfect objective solution does not exists among the maximum and minimum values for the criteria. Thus, the subjective choice is the ideal solution for the decision maker and the negative ideal solution is the most dissimilar solution. This study describes the application of fuzzy TOPSIS with a modification for PB based on an empirical example from a Poznań PB project (Poland).

Suggested Citation

  • Walczak, Dariusz & Rutkowska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Project rankings for participatory budget based on the fuzzy TOPSIS method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(2), pages 706-714.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:260:y:2017:i:2:p:706-714
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.12.044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221716310785
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.12.044?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. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi Attribute Value Theory: an integrated approach for policy support," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65737, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Marichal, Jean-Luc & Roubens, Marc, 2000. "Determination of weights of interacting criteria from a reference set," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(3), pages 641-650, August.
    3. Gomez, J. & Insua, D. Rios & Alfaro, C., 2016. "A participatory budget model under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 351-358.
    4. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    5. Efremov, Roman & Insua, David Rios & Lotov, Alexander, 2009. "A framework for participatory decision support using Pareto frontier visualization, goal identification and arbitration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 459-467, December.
    6. Malhotra, Naresh K, 1984. "Reflections on the Information Overload Paradigm in Consumer Decision Making [Perspectives on Information Overload]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(4), pages 436-440, March.
    7. Gomez, J. & Insua, D. Rios & Lavin, J.M. & Alfaro, C., 2013. "On deciding how to decide: Designing participatory budget processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(3), pages 743-750.
    8. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica & Antomil-Ibias, José, 2014. "Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-17.
    9. Geurts, Jac. L. A. & Joldersma, Cisca, 2001. "Methodology for participatory policy analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(2), pages 300-310, January.
    10. Roszkowska, Ewa & Wachowicz, Tomasz, 2015. "Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 920-932.
    11. Takeda, Eiji & Yu, Po-Lung, 1995. "Assessing priority weights from subsets of pairwise comparisons in multiple criteria optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 315-331, October.
    12. Philippe Mathieu & Marie-Hélène Verrons, 2003. "A Generic Negotiation Model for MAS using XML," Post-Print hal-00732051, HAL.
    13. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    14. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi-Attribute Value Theory: An integrated approach for policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(2), pages 524-541.
    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. Leonid Mylnikov & Martin Kuetz, 2017. "The Risk Assessment Method in Prognostic Models of Production Systems Management with Account of the Time Factor," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3A), pages 291-310.
    2. A. Szczepańska & M. Zagroba & K. Pietrzyk, 2022. "Participatory Budgeting as a Method for Improving Public Spaces in Major Polish Cities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 231-252, July.
    3. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(3), pages 1042-1055.
    4. Ali RezaHoseini & Zahra Rahmani & Morteza BagherPour, 2022. "Performance evaluation of sustainable projects: a possibilistic integrated novel analytic hierarchy process-data envelopment analysis approach using Z-Number information," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3198-3257, March.
    5. Leonid Mylnikov & Rustam Fayzrakhmanov, 2018. "Production Planning with Parameters on the Basis of Dynamic Predictive Models: Interconnection and the Inertness of their Interaction," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 265-281.
    6. Laruelle, Annick, 2021. "Voting to select projects in participatory budgeting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 598-604.
    7. Huang, Wencheng & Shuai, Bin & Sun, Yan & Wang, Yang & Antwi, Eric, 2018. "Using entropy-TOPSIS method to evaluate urban rail transit system operation performance: The China case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 292-303.
    8. Allahyari, Somayeh & Yaghoubi, Saeed & Van Woensel, Tom, 2021. "A novel risk perspective on location-routing planning: An application in cash transportation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    9. Xiaodong Yuan & Weiling Song, 2022. "Evaluating technology innovation capabilities of companies based on entropy- TOPSIS: the case of solar cell companies," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 65-76, June.
    10. Da Huang & Mei Han, 2021. "Research on Evaluation Method of Freight Transportation Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, March.
    11. Leandro Peçanha De Souza & Carlos Francisco Simões Gomes & Alexandre Pinheiro De Barros, 2018. "Implementation of New Hybrid AHP–TOPSIS-2N Method in Sorting and Prioritizing of an it CAPEX Project Portfolio," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 977-1005, July.
    12. Aubert, Alice H. & Lienert, Judit, 2024. "Operational Research for, with, and by citizens: An overview," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 316(3), pages 800-814.

    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. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2020. "Using a Choquet integral-based approach for incorporating decision-maker’s preference judgments in a Data Envelopment Analysis model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1016-1030.
    2. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    3. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Camanho, Ana Santos & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2021. "Incorporating preference information in a range directional composite indicator: The case of Portuguese public hospitals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 633-650.
    4. Oskar Jonsson & Joakim Frögren & Maria Haak & Björn Slaug & Susanne Iwarsson, 2021. "Understanding the Wicked Problem of Providing Accessible Housing for the Ageing Population in Sweden," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Parreiras, R.O. & Kokshenev, I. & Carvalho, M.O.M. & Willer, A.C.M. & Dellezzopolles, C.F. & Nacif, D.B. & Santana, J.A., 2019. "A flexible multicriteria decision-making methodology to support the strategic management of Science, Technology and Innovation research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 725-739.
    6. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė & Anastasija Pozniak & Manuela Tvaronavičienė, 2021. "Assessment of the Sustainability of a Real Estate Project Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Majid Eskafi & Reza Fazeli & Ali Dastgheib & Poonam Taneja & Gudmundur F. Ulfarsson & Ragnheidur I. Thorarinsdottir & Gunnar Stefansson, 2020. "A value-based definition of success in adaptive port planning: a case study of the Port of Isafjordur in Iceland," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(3), pages 403-431, September.
    8. Chan, Chi Kin & Zhou, Yan & Wong, Kar Hung, 2019. "An equilibrium model of the supply chain network under multi-attribute behaviors analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 514-535.
    9. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    10. Danny Samson & Pat Foley & Heng Soon Gan & Marianne Gloet, 2018. "Multi-stakeholder decision theory," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 357-386, September.
    11. Riccardo Beltramo & Andrea Rostagno & Alessandro Bonadonna, 2018. "Land Consolidation Associations and the Management of Territories in Harsh Italian Environments: A Review," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Gandino, E., 2018. "Co-designing the solution space for rural regeneration in a new World Heritage site: A Choice Experiments approachAuthor-Name: Ferretti, V," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1077-1091.
    13. Francisco C. Marques & Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Constantin Zopounidis & Audrius Banaitis, 2022. "A system dynamics-based approach to determinants of family business growth," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 799-819, April.
    14. Mauro Berta & Marta Bottero & Valentina Ferretti, 2018. "A mixed methods approach for the integration of urban design and economic evaluation: Industrial heritage and urban regeneration in China," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(2), pages 208-232, March.
    15. Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza & Moradi-Pour, Shahab & Samany, Najmeh Neysani & Mohammadkhan, Shirin, 2023. "A multiple models-multiple users group GIS-based decision support system for land use problems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    16. Gomez, J. & Insua, D. Rios & Alfaro, C., 2016. "A participatory budget model under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 351-358.
    17. Ferretti, Valentina & Pluchinotta, Irene & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2019. "Studying the generation of alternatives in public policy making processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(1), pages 353-363.
    18. Fancello, Giovanna & Congiu, Tanja & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2020. "Mapping walkability. A subjective value theory approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    19. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    20. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.

    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:eee:ejores:v:260:y:2017:i:2:p:706-714. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.