IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00656784.html

Comparing outcomes profiles of public programmes with ELECTRE assistance instead of observing evolution of a synthetic impact index: illustration of the benefits of a multicriteria evaluation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Maurice Baslé

    (CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Maud Huaulme

    (CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This paper will show how we could ameliorate the quality of public policies and programmes monitoring and ongoing evaluations by using established outranking methods and ELECTRE software assistance. The craftiness is to take the outcomes of programmes for each period and to elaborate the outcomes multidimensional profile, and then to compare these profiles year after year without having the need to calculate and to observe the evolution of the corresponding synthetic impact index. This article outlines all of the net advantages of comparing annual outcomes profiles rather than the evolution of the aggregated index. We aim to show that the outcomes profiles can be compared by the same outranking methods as those used in the case of several options or projects compared during the same year. The well-known ELECTRE software assistance is used.

Suggested Citation

  • Maurice Baslé & Maud Huaulme, 2011. "Comparing outcomes profiles of public programmes with ELECTRE assistance instead of observing evolution of a synthetic impact index: illustration of the benefits of a multicriteria evaluation approach," Post-Print halshs-00656784, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00656784
    DOI: 10.1504/IJMCDM.2011.043555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00656784. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.