IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i2p245-d1340269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sensitivity of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods in Rural Land Consolidation Project Ranking

Author

Listed:
  • Goran Marinković

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Zoran Ilić

    (Academy of Technical and Educational Vocational Studies, 20 Aleksandra Medvedeva, 18000 Nis, Serbia)

  • Žarko Nestorović

    (Joint Stock Company “Elektroprivreda Srbije”, Branch Djerdap, 19320 Kladovo, Serbia)

  • Marko Božić

    (Meixner d.o.o., 16/G Hermanova, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Vladimir Bulatović

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

Abstract

Decisions around distributing available funds among potential land consolidation projects require a thorough analysis in order to maximize the effects of land consolidation. In order to avoid choosing the wrong land consolidation projects, different methods can be used. Generally, there are two possible groups of methods: one based on a qualitative approach (DELPHI; SWOT) and one based on a quantitative approach (AHP, VIKOR, SAW, TOPSIS, etc.). In this research, the focus was on the sensitivity of the resulting rankings affected by varying the input data in multi-criteria analysis methods, with an emphasis on the variation in the weight and the choice of criteria. This research was motivated by the subjective character of the choice of criteria and their weighting before applying the multi-criteria analysis methods. Four methods were included (AHP, TOPSIS, VIKOR, and SAW) for the multi-criteria analysis, with three ways of defining weights (consistent, modified, or quasi-consistent and freely determined without taking consistency into account), in order to determine the influence of the different methods on the final ranking. The weights were defined only by an acceptable interval of values. The sensitivity of the methods was investigated using the differences in the obtained rankings between each method. A case study is provided on real data, and the results are discussed. The results showed a relatively small variance and possible equal rankings of projects by means of statistical analyses. This finding opens up the possibility of the valuation of projects instead of simple rankings.

Suggested Citation

  • Goran Marinković & Zoran Ilić & Žarko Nestorović & Marko Božić & Vladimir Bulatović, 2024. "Sensitivity of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods in Rural Land Consolidation Project Ranking," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:2:p:245-:d:1340269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/245/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/245/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wójcik-Leń, Justyna & Leń, Przemysław & Mika, Monika & Kryszk, Hubert & Kotlarz, Paweł, 2019. "Studies regarding correct selection of statistical methods for the needs of increasing the efficiency of identification of land for consolidation—A case study in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Khorramshahgol, Reza & Moustakis, Vassilis S., 1988. "Delphic hierarchy process (DHP): A methodology for priority setting derived from the Delphi method and analytical hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 347-354, December.
    3. Chen, Hongyi & Kocaoglu, Dundar F., 2008. "A sensitivity analysis algorithm for hierarchical decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 266-288, February.
    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. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    2. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    3. Justyna Wójcik-Leń & Przemysław Leń, 2021. "Evaluation of the Symmetry of Statistical Methods Applied for the Identification of Agricultural Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Rafael Lizarralde & Jaione Ganzarain & Mikel Zubizarreta, 2020. "Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    5. Tamiz, Mehrdad & Jones, Dylan & Romero, Carlos, 1998. "Goal programming for decision making: An overview of the current state-of-the-art," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 569-581, December.
    6. Robert L. Armacost & Jamshid C. Hosseini & Julie Pet-Edwards, 1999. "Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a Two-phase Integrated Decision Approach for Large Nominal Groups," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(6), pages 535-555, November.
    7. Athanassopoulos, Antreas D., 1995. "Goal programming & data envelopment analysis (GoDEA) for target-based multi-level planning: Allocating central grants to the Greek local authorities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 535-550, December.
    8. Rivero-Iglesias, Jose M. & Puente, Javier & Fernandez, Isabel & León, Omar, 2023. "Integrated model for the assessment of power generation alternatives through analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy inference system. Case study of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 563-581.
    9. Min Xia & Linyan Wang & Bo Wen & Wei Zou & Weixin Ou & Zhongqiong Qu, 2021. "Land Consolidation Zoning in Coastal Tidal Areas Based on Landscape Security Pattern: A Case Study of Dafeng District, Yancheng, Jiangsu Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    10. May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Tjader, Youxu Cai & Vargas, Luis G., 2013. "A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 180-188.
    11. Sung Jin Kim & Nasir Jamil Sheikh & Gerald Stokes, 2019. "Assessment of Arms Import Policies Using a Hierarchical Decision Model and Expert Judgments: Case Study of South Korean Arms Procurement Organizations," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1-22, October.
    12. Bielska, Anna & Stańczuk-Gałwiaczek, Małgorzata & Sobolewska-Mikulska, Katarzyna & Mroczkowski, Robert, 2021. "Implementation of the smart village concept based on selected spatial patterns – A case study of Mazowieckie Voivodeship in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    13. Sergio Domínguez & María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Fuzzy Multicriteria Modelling of Decision Making in the Renewal of Healthcare Technologies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-46, June.
    14. Wang, Bing & Kocaoglu, Dundar F. & Daim, Tugrul U. & Yang, Jiting, 2010. "A decision model for energy resource selection in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7130-7141, November.
    15. Ricardo Martín & Víctor Yepes, 2022. "Assessing the Relationship between Landscape and Management within Marinas: The Managers’ Perception," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, June.
    16. Paweł Dziekański & Adam Wyszkowski & Piotr Prus & Andrzej Pawlik & Mansoor Maitah & Magdalena Wrońska, 2022. "Zero Waste as a Determinant of Shaping Green Economy Processes on the Example of Communes of Eastern Poland in 2010–2020," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Theißen, Sebastian & Spinler, Stefan, 2014. "Strategic analysis of manufacturer-supplier partnerships: An ANP model for collaborative CO2 reduction management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(2), pages 383-397.
    18. Sangwon Lee & Suneung Ahn & Changsoon Park & You-Jin Park, 2016. "Development of a Resource Allocation Model Using Competitive Advantage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Wojewodzic, Tomasz & Dacko, Aneta, 2020. "Cadastral Effects Of The Consolidation Pr," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2020(2).
    20. Emanuele Salerno, 2020. "Identifying Value-Increasing Actions for Cultural Heritage Assets through Sensitivity Analysis of Multicriteria Evaluation Results," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, November.

    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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:2:p:245-:d:1340269. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.