On some analogies between one-criterion decision making under uncertainty and multi-criteria decision making under certainty

• Autorzy: Helena Gaspars-Wieloch
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

One-criterion decision making under uncertainty (1-DM/U) is related to situations in which the decision maker (DM) evaluates the alternatives on the basis of one objective, but e.g. due to numerous uncertain future factors some parameters of the problem are not deterministic. Instead of entirely known paramaters, a set of possible scenarios is available. Multi-criteria decision making under certainty (M-DM/C) concerns cases where the DM assesses particular options in terms of many objectives. The parameters are known. Therefore, scenario planning is redundant. Both issues are investigated by many researchers and practitioners, since real economic decision problems are usually at least uncertain or multi-objective. In the paper, numerous analogies between 1-DM/U and M-DM/C are revealed. Some of them have existed for many decades, but others, so far, have not been developed. A careful examination of all the similarities enables an improvement of existing methods and a formulation of new algorithms for 1-DM/U and M-DM/C. The article presents six pairs of similar procedures and contains the description of three novel approaches created by analogy to existing ones.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Decision making; Uncertainty in economic decisions; Scenario planning; Optimalization

PL

Podejmowanie decyzji; Niepewność w decyzjach gospodarczych; Planowanie scenariuszowe; Optymalizacja

• Czasopismo: Economics and Business Review
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: 7 (21)
• Numer: nr 2
• Strony: 17--36

Twórcy

autor

Helena Gaspars-Wieloch

• Poznań University of Economics and Business

Bibliografia

• Bakir, M., Akan, S., & Durmaz, E. (2019). Exploring service quality of low-cost airlines in Europe: An integrated MCDM approach. Economics and Business Review, 19(2), 109-130.
• Bieniek, M. (2016). Bicriteria optimization in the newsvendor problem with exponentially distributed demand. Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 11, 20-35.
• Chiao, K.-P. (2021). Multi-criteria decision making with interval type 2 fuzzy Bonferroni mean. Expert Systems with Applications, 176(15).
• Denkowska, A., & Wanat, S. (2020). Dependencies and systematic risk in the European insurance sector: New evidence based on Copula-DCC-GARCH model and selected clustering methods. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 8(4), 7-27.
• Durbach, I. N. (2019). Scenario planning in the analytic hierarchy process. Futures and Foresight Science, 1(2).
• Durbach, I. N., & Stewart, T. J. (2012). Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 223(1), 1-14.
• Eiselt, H. A., & Marianov, V. (2014). Multi-criteria decision making under uncertainty: A visual approach. International Transactions in Operational Research, 21(4), 525-540.
• Ekel, P., Pedrycz, W., & Pereira, J. (2019). Multicriteria decision-making under conditions of uncertainty: A fuzzy set perspective. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
• Gaspars-Wieloch, H. (2020a). Critical analysis of classical scenario-based decision rules for pure strategy searching. Organizations and Management Series, 149, 155-165.
• Gaspars-Wieloch, H. (2020b). A new application for the Goal Programming-the Target Decision Rule for uncertain problems. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(11), 1-14.
• Gaspars-Wieloch, H. (2021). Scenario planning combined with probabilities as a risk management tool-analysis of pros and cons. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 21(1), 22-40.
• Hayashi, T. (2008). Regret aversion and opportunity dependence. Journal of Economic Theory, 139(1), 242-268.
• Herstatt, C., & Kalogerakis, K. (2005). How to use analogies for breakthrough innovations?. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 2(3), 331-347.
• Hey, J., Linsey, J., Agogino, A. M., & Wood, K. L. (2008). Analogies and metaphors in creative design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 283-294.
• Homaei, S., & Hamdy, M. (2020). A robustness-based decision making approach for multi-target high performance buildings under uncertain scenarios. Applied Energy, 267.
• Hopfe, C. J., Augenbroe, G. L. M., & Hensen, J. L. M. (2013). Multi-criteria decision making under uncertainty in building performance assessment. Building and Environment, 69, 81-90.
• Karvetski, C. & Lambert, C. W. (2012). Evaluating deep uncertainties in strategic priority-setting with an application to facility energy investments. Systems Engineering, 15, 483-493.
• Latoszek, M., & Ślepaczuk, R. (2020). Does the inclusion of exposure of volatility into diversified portfolio improve the investment results? Portfolio construction from the perspective of a Polish investor. Economics and Business Review, 20(1), 46-81.
• Maciel, L., Ballini, R., & Gomide, F. (2018). Evolving fuzzy modelling for yield curve forecasting. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 15(3), 290-311.
• Martin, M. (2003). "It's like... You know": The use of analogies and heuristics in teaching introductory statistical methods. Journal of Statistics Education, 11(2).
• Michnik, J. (2013). Scenario planning + MCDA procedure for innovation selection problem. Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences, 38(3), 207-220.
• Mietzner, D., & Reger, G. (2005). Advantages and disadvantages of scenario approaches for strategic foresight. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 1(2), 220-239.
• Mises von, L. (1949). Human action. A treatise on economics. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Nelyubin, A. P., & Podinovski, V. V. (2017). Multicriteria choice based on criteria importance methods with uncertain preference information. Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 57(9), 1475-1483.
• Oliveira, S. A., Gomes, C. F. S., Clarkson, C. T., Sanseverino, A. M., Barcelos, M. R. S., Costa, I. P. A., & Santos, M. (2021), Multiple criteria decision making and prospective scenarios model for selection of companies to be incubated. Algorithms, 14.
• Pirvu, T. A., & Schulze, K. (2012). Multi-stock portfolio optimization under prospect theory. Mathematics and Financial Economics, 6(4), 337-362.
• Roxburgh, C. (2009, November). The use and abuse of scenarios, 1-10. Mc Kinsey and Company.
• Sen, A. K. (1984). Collective choice and social welfare. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Silber, J. R. (2017). Constructing a scenario planning method as a tool for political risk mitigation. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Stellenbosch University.
• Stewart, T. J., French, S., & Rios, J. (2013). Integrating multicriteria decision analysis and scenario planning-review and extention. Omega, 41(4), 679-688.
• Vilkkumaa, E., Liesio, J., Salo, A., & Imola-Sheppard, L. (2018). Scenario-based portfolio model for building robust and proactive strategies. European Journal of Operations Research, 266(1), 205-220.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.18559/ebr.2021.2.3