IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v37y2009i1p238-251.html

Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation management

Author

Listed:
  • Geldermann, Jutta
  • Bertsch, Valentin
  • Treitz, Martin
  • French, Simon
  • Papamichail, Konstantinia N.
  • Hämäläinen, Raimo P.

Abstract

Environmental emergency situations can differ in many ways, for instance according to their causes and the dimension of their impacts. Yet, they share the characteristic of sudden onset and the necessity for a coherent and effective emergency management. In this paper we consider decision support in the event of a nuclear or radiological accident in Europe. RODOS, an acronym for real-time on-line decision support system, is a decision support system designed to provide support from the early phases through to the medium and long-term phases. This work highlights the role of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) within RODOS in ensuring the transparency of decision processes within emergency and remediation management. Special emphasis is placed on the evaluation of alternative remediation or countermeasure strategies using the multi-criteria decision support tool Web-HIPRE in scenario focused decision making workshops involving different stakeholder and expert groups. Decision support is enhanced by a module that generates natural language explanations to facilitate the understanding of the evaluation process, therefore contributing to the direct involvement of the decision makers, with the aim of increasing their confidence in the results of the analyses carried out, forming an audit trail for the decision making process and improving the acceptability of the system as a whole.

Suggested Citation

  • Geldermann, Jutta & Bertsch, Valentin & Treitz, Martin & French, Simon & Papamichail, Konstantinia N. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2009. "Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 238-251, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:1:p:238-251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(06)00152-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jutta Geldermann & Valentin Bertsch & Otto Rentz, 2006. "Multi-Criteria Decision Support and Uncertainty Handling, Propagation and Visualisation for Emergency and Remediation Management," Operations Research Proceedings, in: Hans-Dietrich Haasis & Herbert Kopfer & Jörn Schönberger (ed.), Operations Research Proceedings 2005, pages 755-760, Springer.
    2. Stewart, TJ, 1992. "A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 569-586.
    3. Simon French, 2003. "Modelling, making inferences and making decisions: The roles of sensitivity analysis," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 11(2), pages 229-251, December.
    4. Bose, Utpal & Davey, Anne M. & Olson, David L., 1997. "Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-706, December.
    5. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    6. Papamichail, K. N. & Robertson, I., 2005. "Integrating decision making and regulation in the management control process," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 319-332, August.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Stewart, TJ, 1994. "Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision making: A response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 205-206, March.
    9. Doyle, J & Green, R, 1993. "Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 713-715, November.
    10. Kleine, A., 2004. "A general model framework for DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 17-23, February.
    11. Jasbir S. Dhaliwal & Izak Benbasat, 1996. "The Use and Effects of Knowledge-Based System Explanations: Theoretical Foundations and a Framework for Empirical Evaluation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 342-362, September.
    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. Tofallis, C., 1996. "Improving discernment in DEA using profiling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 361-364, June.
    2. Jiménez, Antonio & Mateos, Alfonso & Sabio, Pilar, 2013. "Dominance intensity measure within fuzzy weight oriented MAUT: An application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 397-405.
    3. Mustafa, A. & Goh, M., 1996. "Multi-criterion models for higher education administration," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 167-178, April.
    4. Maryam Bagherikahvarin & Yves Smet, 2017. "Determining new possible weight values in PROMETHEE: a procedure based on data envelopment analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(5), pages 484-495, May.
    5. Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Chang, Wei-Chen & Li, Wei-Hao & Lin, Zu-Liang, 2013. "Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 462-469.
    6. Harald Dyckhoff & Katrin Allen, 1999. "Theoretische Begründung einer Effizienzanalyse mittels Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 411-436, May.
    7. P P Sutton & R H Green, 2007. "Choice is a value statement. On inferring optimal multiple attribute portfolios from non-optimal nominations," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(11), pages 1526-1533, November.
    8. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 1998. "Multicriteria aid for agricultural decisions using preference relations: methodology and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 483-503, December.
    9. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. 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.
    11. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Yang, Jian-Bo & Wong, Brandon Y.H. & Xu, Dong-Ling & Stewart, Theodor J., 2009. "Integrating DEA-oriented performance assessment and target setting using interactive MOLP methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(1), pages 205-222, May.
    13. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Xu, Yan, 2013. "Managing critical success strategies for an enterprise resource planning project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(3), pages 604-614.
    14. Lucas Miguel Alencar Correia & Jonhatan Magno Norte Silva & Wilza Karla Leite & Ruan Eduardo Carneiro Lucas & Geraldo Alves Colaço, 2022. "A multicriteria decision model to rank workstations in a footwear industry based on a FITradeoff-ranking method for ergonomics interventions," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 3335-3371, September.
    15. Dalton Garcia Borges de Souza & Erivelton Antonio dos Santos & Nei Yoshihiro Soma & Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silva, 2021. "MCDM-Based R&D Project Selection: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-34, October.
    16. Dorota Górecka & Ewa Roszkowska & Tomasz Wachowicz, 2016. "The MARS Approach in the Verbal and Holistic Evaluation of the Negotiation Template," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 1097-1136, November.
    17. Renaud Caillet, 2003. "Analyse multicritère : Étude de comparaison des méthodes existantes en vue d'une application en analyse de cycle de vie," CIRANO Working Papers 2003s-53, CIRANO.
    18. Bragge, Johanna, 2001. "Premediation analysis of the energy taxation dispute in Finland," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
    20. A Jessop, 2011. "Using imprecise estimates for weights," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1048-1055, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:1:p:238-251. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.