IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v31y2011i8p1211-1225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Weight of Evidence Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Igor Linkov
  • Paul Welle
  • Drew Loney
  • Alex Tkachuk
  • Laure Canis
  • J. B. Kim
  • Todd Bridges

Abstract

Weight of evidence (WOE) methods are key components of ecological and human health risk assessments. Most WOE applications rely on the qualitative integration of diverse lines of evidence (LOE) representing impact on ecological receptors and humans. Recent calls for transparency in assessments and justifiability of management decisions are pushing the community to consider quantitative methods for integrated risk assessment and management. This article compares and contrasts the type of information required for application of individual WOE techniques and the outcomes that they provide in ecological risk assessment and proposes a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for integrating individual LOE in support of management decisions. The use of quantitative WOE techniques is illustrated for a hypothetical but realistic case study of selecting remedial alternatives at a contaminated aquatic site. Use of formal MCDA does not necessarily eliminate biases and judgment calls necessary for selecting remedial alternatives, but allows for transparent evaluation and fusion of individual LOE. It also provides justifiable methods for selecting remedial alternatives consistent with stakeholder and decision‐maker values.

Suggested Citation

  • Igor Linkov & Paul Welle & Drew Loney & Alex Tkachuk & Laure Canis & J. B. Kim & Todd Bridges, 2011. "Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Weight of Evidence Evaluation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(8), pages 1211-1225, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:8:p:1211-1225
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01585.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01585.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01585.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas L. Weed, 2005. "Weight of Evidence: A Review of Concept and Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1545-1557, December.
    2. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, September.
    3. Gregory S. Parnell & Michael Frimpon & John Barnes & Jack M. Kloeber, Jr. & Richard F. Deckro & Jack A. Jackson, 2001. "Safety Risk Analysis of an Innovative Environmental Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 143-156, February.
    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. Igor Linkov & Matthew D. Wood & Renae Ditmer & Anthony Cox & Robert Ross, 2013. "Collective risk management: insights and opportunities for DoD decision-makers," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 335-340, September.
    2. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    3. Randall Lutter & Linda Abbott & Rick Becker & Chris Borgert & Ann Bradley & Gail Charnley & Susan Dudley & Alan Felsot & Nancy Golden & George Gray & Daland Juberg & Mary Mitchell & Nancy Rachman & Lo, 2015. "Improving Weight of Evidence Approaches to Chemical Evaluations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 186-192, February.
    4. Fernando Reboredo, 2013. "Socio-economic, environmental, and governance impacts of illegal logging," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 295-304, June.
    5. Henner Gimpel & Dominikus Kleindienst & Daniela Waldmann, 2018. "The disclosure of private data: measuring the privacy paradox in digital services," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 28(4), pages 475-490, November.
    6. Jaana Sorvari & Eija Schultz & Jari Haimi, 2013. "Assessment of Ecological Risks at Former Landfill Site Using TRIAD Procedure and Multicriteria Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 203-219, February.
    7. Steven Duret & Hong‐Minh Hoang & Evelyne Derens‐Bertheau & Anthony Delahaye & Onrawee Laguerre & Laurent Guillier, 2019. "Combining Quantitative Risk Assessment of Human Health, Food Waste, and Energy Consumption: The Next Step in the Development of the Food Cold Chain?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 906-925, April.
    8. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.

    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. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.
    2. Fancello, Giovanna & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2021. "Learning urban capabilities from behaviours. A focus on visitors values for urban planning," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Carlos S. & Vieira, Victor, 2008. "Prioritization of bridges and tunnels in earthquake risk mitigation using multicriteria decision analysis: Application to Lisbon," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 442-450, June.
    4. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    5. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    6. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Kaveh Madani & Laura Read & Laleh Shalikarian, 2014. "Voting Under Uncertainty: A Stochastic Framework for Analyzing Group Decision Making Problems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(7), pages 1839-1856, May.
    8. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    9. Haurant, P. & Oberti, P. & Muselli, M., 2011. "Multicriteria selection aiding related to photovoltaic plants on farming fields on Corsica island: A real case study using the ELECTRE outranking framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 676-688, February.
    10. Growiec, Jakub, 2018. "Factor-specific technology choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-14.
    11. José M. Merigó & Anna M. Gil-Lafuente & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2014. "A new method for fuzzy decision making under risk and uncertainty," International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1), pages 29-42.
    12. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    13. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    14. Grabisch, Michel & Kojadinovic, Ivan & Meyer, Patrick, 2008. "A review of methods for capacity identification in Choquet integral based multi-attribute utility theory: Applications of the Kappalab R package," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 766-785, April.
    15. Pablo Aragonés‐Beltrán & Mª. Carmen González‐Cruz & Astrid León‐Camargo & Rosario Viñoles‐Cebolla, 2023. "Assessment of regional development needs according to criteria based on the Sustainable Development Goals in the Meta Region (Colombia)," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 1101-1121, April.
    16. Boris Yatsalo & Sergey Gritsyuk & Terry Sullivan & Benjamin Trump & Igor Linkov, 2016. "Multi-criteria risk management with the use of DecernsMCDA: methods and case studies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 266-276, September.
    17. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    18. Becchio, Cristina & Bottero, Marta Carla & Corgnati, Stefano Paolo & Dell’Anna, Federico, 2018. "Decision making for sustainable urban energy planning: an integrated evaluation framework of alternative solutions for a NZED (Net Zero-Energy District) in Turin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 803-817.
    19. Tunjo Perić & Zoran Babić & Josip Matejaš, 2018. "Comparative analysis of application efficiency of two iterative multi objective linear programming methods (MP method and STEM method)," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(3), pages 565-583, September.
    20. Morgenroth, Edgar & FitzGerald, John & FitzGerald, John, 2006. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Morgenroth, Edgar (ed.),Ex-Ante Evaluation of the Investment Priorities for the National Development Plan 2007-2013, chapter 24, pages 317-333, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
      • Baker, Terence J. & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick, 1996. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Baker, Terence J. (ed.),Economic Implications for Ireland of EMU, chapter 12, pages 339-352, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:8:p:1211-1225. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.