The need for unconventional value aggregation techniques: experiences from eliciting stakeholder preferences in environmental management

Peter Reichert (), Klemens Niederberger, Peter Rey, Urs Helg and Susanne Haertel-Borer
Additional contact information
Peter Reichert: Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology
Klemens Niederberger: AquaPlus AG
Peter Rey: HYDRA Institut für Angewandte Hydrobiologie
Urs Helg: Swiss Federal Office for the Environment, FOEN
Susanne Haertel-Borer: Swiss Federal Office for the Environment, FOEN

EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 2019, vol. 7, issue 3, No 3, 197-219

Abstract: Abstract Despite the large literature about non-additive value aggregation techniques, in the large majority of applied decision support processes, additive value aggregation functions are used. The main reasons for this may be the simplicity of the approach, minimum elicitation requirements, software availability, and the appeal of the underlying preference independence concepts that may be strengthened by an adequate choice of sub-objectives and attributes. However, in an applied decision support process, the decision maker(s) or the stakeholders decide on the sub-objectives and attributes to characterize the state of a system and they have to provide information that allows the decision analyst to express their preferences as a value function of these attributes. It is the task of the decision analyst to find the parameterization and parameter values of a value function that fits best the expressed preferences. We describe a value function elicitation process for the ideal morphological state of a lake shore, performed with stakeholders from federal and cantonal authorities and from environmental consulting companies in Switzerland. This process led to the elicitation of strongly non-additive and partly even non-concave value aggregation functions. The objective of this paper is to raise the awareness about the importance of carefully testing the assumptions underlying parameterized (often additive) value aggregation techniques during the preferences elicitation process and to be flexible regarding evaluating value functions that deviate from the often used additive aggregation scheme. This can lead to a higher confidence that additive aggregation is suitable for the specific decision problem or to the selection of alternative aggregation techniques that better represent the decision maker’s preferences in case additivity is violated.

Keywords: Environmental decision support; Stakeholder involvement; Elicitation; Value function; Objectives hierarchy; Non-additive aggregation; 91B06; 91B10; 91B16; 90B50 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40070-019-00101-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eurjdp:v:7:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s40070-019-00101-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... search/journal/40070

DOI: 10.1007/s40070-019-00101-9

Access Statistics for this article

EURO Journal on Decision Processes is currently edited by Vincent Mousseau

More articles in EURO Journal on Decision Processes from Springer, EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().