An Evaluation of Multiple Objective Decision Support Weighting Techniques in Natural Resource Management

By Stefan Hajkowicz, G. Mcdonald, Phil Smith. 2000

164 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms (2006, background): “…of a region 1, environment; 2, ecology; 3, economy; 4, sociology; 5, psychology; 6, physiognomy/cultural geography Preference structure Utility theory Hajkowicz et al. (2000) Utility theory with the following weighting methods: fixed point scoring, rating, ordinal ranking, a graphical method 6/5…”
A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning (2009, methodology): “…MCDM methods can be defined as decision support techniques that have a finite number of alternatives, a set of objectives and criteria bywhich the alternatives are to be judged and amethod of ranking alternatives, based on howwell they satisfy the objectives and criteria (Hajkowicz et al., 2000a).”
Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution (2021, background): “Hajkowicz et al. (2000) proposed the use of a binary scale as a potential solution, with decision-makers describing whether criteria were more, less, or equally important than others.”
A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management (2008, background): “Studies of how decision makers interact with weighting techniques have shown they are most comfortable with ordinal rankings of criteria importance (Hajkowicz et al., 2000).”