View article

Multicriteria decision aid (MCDA) methods are used to support decision making in case of problems where conflicting economic, environmental, societal, technical, and aesthetic objectives are involved. This is why MCDA is increasingly applied for questions concerning sustainable development. MCDA methods differ in the way the idea of multiple criteria is operationalised. In particular each method shows its own properties with respect to the way of assessing criteria, the application and computation of weights, the mathematical algorithm utilised, the model to describe the system of preferences of the individual facing decision-making, the level of uncertainty embedded in the data set and the ability for stakeholders to participate in the process.

This paper investigates the differences between four MCDA methods by use of case studies: AHP, NAIADE, MAUT, and MOP/GP. The aim of this study is:(a) to develop a list of criteria on which MCDA methods can be compared in context of a certain application, and (b) to compare the four methods by use of the developed criteria in order to identify strengths and weaknesses of these methods with regard to dealing with sustainability issues.