IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/regstd/v45y2011i2p261-276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological Considerations on Regional Sustainability Assessment Based on Multicriteria and Sensitivity Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Giuseppe Munda
  • Michaela Saisana

Abstract

Munda G. and Saisana M. Methodological considerations on regional sustainability assessment based on multicriteria and sensitivity analysis, Regional Studies. This paper proposes the use of a non-compensatory multicriteria approach combined with sensitivity analysis for constructing composite indicators of sustainability. An illustrative example on Spanish and selected Mediterranean regions is used. The sensitivity analysis shows that excluding an indicator from a twenty-nine-indicator data set (which represents, in principle, a small structural change) has a much lower impact on the regional ranking if that is based on a non-compensatory multicriteria approach than on the classical linear aggregation, for example the weighted arithmetic average. An alternative approach that employs endogenous weighting (region-specific weights) and is based on data envelopment analysis is discussed. [image omitted] Munda G. et Saisana M. Des considerations methodologiques basees sur une analyse a criteres multiples et de sensibilite quant a l'evaluation de la notion de la region durable, Regional Studies. Cet article propose l'emploi d'une facon a criteres multiples non-compensatoire conjointement avec une analyse de sensibilite afin de construire des indicateurs composites de la notion de durabilite. A titre d'illustration, on se sert des regions espagnoles et de certaines regions mediterraneennes. L'analyse de sensibilite laisse voir que ne pas retenir un indicateur dans un ensemble de donnees de vingt-neuf indicateurs (ce qui represente, en principe, une modification structurelle negligeable) a un impact nettement plus faible sur le rang regional si celui-ci est base sur une facon a criteres multiples non-compensatoire que sur une agregation classique lineaire, par exemple la moyenne arithmetique ponderee. Une autre facon qui emploie une ponderation endogene (des ponderations specifiques a une region) et basee sur une analyse de l'enveloppement des donnees. Durabilite regionale Indicateurs composites Evaluation a criteres multiples Analyse de sensibilite Munda G. und Saisana M. Methodologische Aspekte bei der Bewertung der regionalen Nachhaltigkeit mit Hilfe einer multikriteriellen und Empfindlichkeitsanalyse, Regional Studies. In diesem Beitrag wird fur die Entwicklung von kombinierten Nachhaltigkeitsindikatoren ein nicht kompensatorischer multikriterieller Ansatz in Kombination mit einer Empfindlichkeitsanalyse vorgeschlagen. Als Beispiel zur Verdeutlichung dienen spanische und ausgewahlte Mittelmeerregionen. Wie aus der Empfindlichkeitsanalyse hervorgeht, wirkt sich der Ausschluss eines Indikators aus einem Datensatz mit 29 Indikatoren (was im Prinzip einer geringfugigen strukturellen Veranderung gleichkommt) weitaus weniger stark auf den regionalen Rang aus, wenn die Rangordnung statt auf der klassischen linearen Aggregation (z. B. dem gewichteten arithmetischen Durchschnitt) auf einem nicht kompensatorischen multikriteriellen Ansatz aufbaut. Es wird ein alternativer Ansatz erortert, bei dem eine endogene Gewichtung (mit regionalspezifischen Gewichten) zum Einsatz kommt und der auf einer Dateneinhullanalyse basiert. Regionale Nachhaltigkeit Kombinierte Indikatoren Multikriterielle Bewertung Empfindlichkeitsanalyse Munda G. y Saisana M. Consideraciones metodologicas sobre la valoracion de la sostenibilidad regional basada en diferentes criterios y un analisis de sensibilidad, Regional Studies. En este articulo proponemos el uso de un planteamiento de varios criterios no compensatorios que combinamos con un analisis de sensibilidad para construir indicadores compuestos de sostenibilidad. Utilizamos un ejemplo ilustrativo con regiones espanolas y regiones mediterraneas seleccionadas. El analisis de sensibilidad muestra que si excluimos un indicador de un grupo de datos formado por veintinueve indicadores (lo que, en principio, representa un pequeno cambio estructural) tiene un impacto mucho menor en la clasificacion regional si esta se basa en un planteamiento de varios criterios no compensatorios en vez de la agregacion lineal clasica (por ejemplo el promedio aritmetico ponderado). Aqui analizamos un enfoque alternativo que emplea la ponderacion endogena (ponderaciones especificas a las regiones) y esta basado en un analisis envolvente de datos. Sostenibilidad regional Indicadores compuestos Evaluacion de muchos criterios Analisis de sensibilidad

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppe Munda & Michaela Saisana, 2011. "Methodological Considerations on Regional Sustainability Assessment Based on Multicriteria and Sensitivity Analysis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 261-276.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:45:y:2011:i:2:p:261-276
    DOI: 10.1080/00343401003713316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00343401003713316
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00343401003713316?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. Kenneth J. Arrow & Herve Raynaud, 1986. "Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511754, December.
    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. Georgios Tsaples & Jason Papathanasiou & Andreas C. Georgiou, 2022. "An Exploratory DEA and Machine Learning Framework for the Evaluation and Analysis of Sustainability Composite Indicators in the EU," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(13), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Carrillo, Marianela & Jorge, Jesús M., 2017. "Multidimensional Analysis of Regional Tourism Sustainability in Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 89-98.
    3. Manal Ammari & Mohammed Chentouf & Mohammed Ammari & Laïla Ben Allal, 2022. "Assessing National Progress in Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: A Case Study of Morocco," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-29, November.
    4. Sergiy Smetana & Christine Tamásy & Alexander Mathys & Volker Heinz, 2015. "Sustainability and regions: sustainability assessment in regional perspective," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), pages 163-186, November.
    5. Lozano-Oyola, Macarena & Contreras, Ignacio & Blancas, Francisco Javier, 2019. "An Operational Non-compensatory Composite Indicator: Measuring Sustainable Tourism in Andalusian Urban Destinations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Marianela Carrillo, 2022. "Measuring Progress towards Sustainability in the European Union within the 2030 Agenda Framework," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Tsaples, G. & Papathanasiou, J., 2021. "Data envelopment analysis and the concept of sustainability: A review and analysis of the literature," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    8. Fusco, Elisa, 2015. "Enhancing non-compensatory composite indicators: A directional proposal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 620-630.
    9. Carmen García-Peña & Moneyba González-Medina & Jose Manuel Diaz-Sarachaga, 2021. "Assessment of the Governance Dimension in the Frame of the 2030 Agenda: Evidence from 100 Spanish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, May.
    10. Giuseppe Munda, 2014. "On the Use of Shadow Prices for Sustainable Well-Being Measurement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 911-918, September.
    11. Gianluca Gucciardi, 2022. "Measuring the relative development and integration of EU countries’ capital markets using composite indicators and cluster analysis," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(4), pages 1043-1083, November.
    12. Ludmila Petkovová & David Hartman & Tomáš Pavelka, 2020. "Problems of Aggregation of Sustainable Development Indicators at the Regional Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Byomkesh Talukder & Keith W. Hipel & Gary W. vanLoon, 2017. "Developing Composite Indicators for Agricultural Sustainability Assessment: Effect of Normalization and Aggregation Techniques," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-27, November.
    14. Emanuele Felice, 2016. "The Misty Grail: The Search for a Comprehensive Measure of Development and the Reasons for GDP Primacy," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 47(5), pages 967-994, September.
    15. Luzzati, T. & Gucciardi, G., 2015. "A non-simplistic approach to composite indicators and rankings: an illustration by comparing the sustainability of the EU Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 25-38.
    16. Zepharovich, Elena & Ceddia, M. Graziano & Rist, Stephan, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of land-use scenarios in the Chaco Salteño: Complementing the three-pillar sustainability approach with environmental justice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    17. Zhou, Haibo & Yang, Yi & Chen, Yao & Zhu, Joe, 2018. "Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: The origins, development and future directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 1-16.
    18. Barnes, Andrew Peter, 2012. "A method for constructing an index of sustainable intensification within the developed country context," Working Papers 131466, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    19. Georgia Makridou, Kostas Andriosopoulos, Michael Doumpos, and Constantin Zopounidis, 2015. "A Two-stage approach for energy efficiency analysis in European Union countries," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    20. Giuseppe Munda, 2015. "Beyond Gdp: An Overview Of Measurement Issues In Redefining ‘Wealth’," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 403-422, July.
    21. Emanuele Felice, 2012. "Neither dashboard nor 'mashup' indices: an empirical wealth approach as a pathway to a comprehensive measure of development," UHE Working papers 2012_01, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    22. Floridi, Matteo & Pagni, Simone & Falorni, Simone & Luzzati, Tommaso, 2011. "An exercise in composite indicators construction: Assessing the sustainability of Italian regions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1440-1447, June.
    23. Paola Sau & Brunella Arru & Federica Cisilino & Roberto Furesi & Pietro Pulina & Fabio A. Madau, 2023. "Economic and Environmental Sustainability Trade-Off Analysis in Sheep Farming Using the Farm Accountancy Data Network Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-24, December.
    24. Pingtao Yi & Lu Wang & Danning Zhang & Weiwei Li, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of Provincial-Level Regions in China Using Composite Sustainable Indicator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    25. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano, 2016. "Methodological challenges in building composite indexes: Linking theory to practice," MPRA Paper 73276, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Tommaso Agasisti & Giuseppe Munda & Ralph Hippe, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of European education systems by combining Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple-Criteria Evaluation," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 105-124, June.
    2. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    3. Noelia Rico & Camino R. Vela & Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Irene Díaz, 2021. "Reducing the Computational Time for the Kemeny Method by Exploiting Condorcet Properties," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, June.
    4. Subochev, Andrey & Zakhlebin, Igor, 2014. "Alternative versions of the global competitive industrial performance ranking constructed by methods from social choice theory," MPRA Paper 67462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Susumu Cato, 2014. "Menu Dependence and Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 561-577, May.
    6. Richter, Michael & Rubinstein, Ariel, 2019. ""Convex preferences": a new definition," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(4), November.
    7. William Gehrlein, 2002. "Condorcet's paradox and the likelihood of its occurrence: different perspectives on balanced preferences ," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 171-199, March.
    8. Tommaso Agasisti & Giuseppe Munda, 2017. "Efficiency of investment in compulsory education: An Overview of Methodological Approaches," JRC Research Reports JRC106681, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Nguyen Nghia Bien, 2016. "Forest Management Systems in the Uplands of Vietnam: Social, Economic and Environmental Perspectives," EEPSEA Research Report rr2016052, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Apr 2016.
    10. Joey Au & Andrew Coleman & Trudy Sullivan, 2015. "A Practical Approach to Well-being Based Policy Development: What Do New Zealanders Want from Their Retirement Income Policies?," Treasury Working Paper Series 15/14, New Zealand Treasury.
    11. Gans, Joshua S., 1996. "On the impossibility of rational choice under incomplete information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 287-309, March.
    12. Vanessa Silva & Danielle Morais & Adiel Almeida, 2010. "A Multicriteria Group Decision Model to Support Watershed Committees in Brazil," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(14), pages 4075-4091, November.
    13. Giuseppe Munda, 2003. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE)," UHE Working papers 2003_04, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    14. Perez, J. & Barba-Romero, S., 1995. "Three practical criteria of comparison among ordinal preference aggregating rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 473-487, September.
    15. Dias, Luis C. & Lamboray, Claude, 2010. "Extensions of the prudence principle to exploit a valued outranking relation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 828-837, March.
    16. Archibugi, Franco, 1996. "Towards a new discipline of planning," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 81-102, June.
    17. Leo Katz, 2010. "A Theory of Loopholes," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-31, January.
    18. Peter J. Hammond, 2022. "Prerationality as Avoiding Predictably Regrettable Consequences," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 73(6), pages 943-976.
    19. Truchon, Michel, 1999. "La démocratie : oui, mais laquelle?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 75(1), pages 189-214, mars-juin.
    20. Markus Schulze, 2011. "A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and condorcet-consistent single-winner election method," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(2), pages 267-303, February.

    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:taf:regstd:v:45:y:2011:i:2:p:261-276. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRES20 .

    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.