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

Goran Marinković, Zoran Ilić, Žarko Nestorović (), Marko Božić and Vladimir Bulatović
Additional contact information
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

Land, 2024, vol. 13, issue 2, 1-14

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.

Keywords: AHP; TOPSIS; VIKOR; SAW; hybrid model; decision making (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/245/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/245/ (text/html)

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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:2:p:245-:d:1340269

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().