Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
O
use a set of criteria to judge the options
O
assign weights to each objective/criterion
O
use a method by which the options are ranked, based on how well they
satisfy each of the criteria (Proctor 2009).
Features of an MCA include:
O
simplification of complex decision problems using an interactive decision
support software;
O
providing an important means of communication and structure for
discussion between the decision making team and the wider community;
O
a diversity of evaluation techniques that enable use of qualitative and
quantitative data;
O
decision makers can specify the level of complexity: it can be simple or
elaborate to suit the application and needs of decision-makers;
O
the ability to identify trade-offs;
O
the imposition of structure and transparency on the problem by identifying
options criteria and preferences for criteria;
O
sensitivity analysis of results (to determine significance of individual data
values in determining the final result and can take account of uncertainty
in estimating figures involved) (Proctor 2009, Hajkowicz
et al
. 2000).
One of the limitations of the MCA is that some techniques are extremely
complex, must be undertaken by a specialist, and as such may detract from
transparency or even the decision-maker understanding the trade-offs. On
the other hand, graphical illustrations of implications can be used to enhance
transparency through including stakeholder input and judgements in the
decision-making. A variety of MCA techniques has been used in different
contexts, making MCA approaches difficult to compare. There is little
guidance as to which should be used in different circumstances. However,
becoming familiar with techniques used in the different cases presented
below can foster insight and deliberation into how it could be used or adapted
for other purposes.
One example of its use in water resource planning in Australia is
documented in Hamstead
et al.
(2008) in relation to the Victorian Central
Region Sustainable Water Strategy. In this case a multiple-criteria 'sustain-
ability assessment' of options provided a method of integrating a wide
range of factors into the decision-making process. Before being short-listed,
options were measured against five key assessment criteria of: realistic, scale,
impact (environmental), cost and fairness. The short-listed options were then
assessed against environmental, economic and social criteria (including social
acceptability and fairness).
Assessment of each option was presented in tables as an appendix to the
draft strategy (see Figures 8.2 and 8.3 in colour plates for sample infor-
mation). The results are colour-coded in shades ranging from dark orange to
