Arbitrage Possibilities in Conflict Situations

John De Reuck (), Des Klass () and Olive Schmidenberg ()
Additional contact information
John De Reuck: Taylors College
Des Klass: Curtin University of Technology
Olive Schmidenberg: Curtin University of Technology

Group Decision and Negotiation, 2004, vol. 13, issue 5, No 4, 437-448

Abstract: Abstract This paper argues for a new theoretical methodology that delivers ‘best bet’ decision outcomes in contexts where issues are contested. Governed by the procedural parameters of such a Generalised Decision Assurance Methodology, a multi-criteria decision modelling approach is proposed that allows for the identification of arbitrage possibilities that emerge at the interface between conflicting sets of interests. Such possibilities are then exploited to secure a solution set that is maximally justifiable to both parties.

Keywords: decision assurance; GDAM; MCDM (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2004
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000045747.35080.b4 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:grdene:v:13:y:2004:i:5:d:10.1023_b:grup.0000045747.35080.b4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/10726/PS2

DOI: 10.1023/B:GRUP.0000045747.35080.b4

Access Statistics for this article

Group Decision and Negotiation is currently edited by Gregory E. Kersten

More articles in Group Decision and Negotiation from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().