Using qualitative information elicited from a panel to obtain robust conclusions: a protocol and an application to improve integrated pest management systems

IF 4.4 3区 管理学 Q1 OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE Annals of Operations Research Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1007/s10479-024-06162-7
Luis C. Dias, Pedro Marques, Rita Garcia, Fernanda de Santo, Rita Tentúgal, Tiago Natal-da-Luz, Álvaro Sousa, José Paulo Sousa, Fausto Freire
{"title":"Using qualitative information elicited from a panel to obtain robust conclusions: a protocol and an application to improve integrated pest management systems","authors":"Luis C. Dias, Pedro Marques, Rita Garcia, Fernanda de Santo, Rita Tentúgal, Tiago Natal-da-Luz, Álvaro Sousa, José Paulo Sousa, Fausto Freire","doi":"10.1007/s10479-024-06162-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Multicriteria aggregation methods typically require inputs from decision makers concerning the relative importance of the criteria. This work presents an approach to use qualitative information elicited from a panel, which can be applied to compensatory and non-compensatory multicriteria aggregation methods. In particular, it considers the additive multiattribute value function and ELECTRE, two classical methods with well-known differences in the meaning of the criteria weights. Moreover, the proposed protocol makes a distinction between the importance of improving the current situation and the importance of not worsening the current situation. The inputs from the panel are aggregated to define constraints on the importance-related parameters, which can then be used for robustness and stochastic analyses. As a real-world application, a comparison of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is performed, considering the case of carrots cultivation in a French region. The comparisons are based on a sustainability assessment of the current practices and alternative IPM systems, using data from field trials, laboratory experiments and preferences from stakeholders. Results are robust to weighting choices, thus identifying which changes are recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":8215,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Operations Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Operations Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-024-06162-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multicriteria aggregation methods typically require inputs from decision makers concerning the relative importance of the criteria. This work presents an approach to use qualitative information elicited from a panel, which can be applied to compensatory and non-compensatory multicriteria aggregation methods. In particular, it considers the additive multiattribute value function and ELECTRE, two classical methods with well-known differences in the meaning of the criteria weights. Moreover, the proposed protocol makes a distinction between the importance of improving the current situation and the importance of not worsening the current situation. The inputs from the panel are aggregated to define constraints on the importance-related parameters, which can then be used for robustness and stochastic analyses. As a real-world application, a comparison of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is performed, considering the case of carrots cultivation in a French region. The comparisons are based on a sustainability assessment of the current practices and alternative IPM systems, using data from field trials, laboratory experiments and preferences from stakeholders. Results are robust to weighting choices, thus identifying which changes are recommended.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用从专家小组获得的定性信息得出可靠结论:改进虫害综合防治系统的规程和应用
多标准聚合方法通常需要决策者提供有关标准相对重要性的信息。本研究提出了一种使用从专家小组获得的定性信息的方法,该方法可应用于补偿性和非补偿性多标准聚合方法。特别是,它考虑了加法多属性值函数和 ELECTRE 这两种在标准权重含义上存在众所周知差异的经典方法。此外,建议的方案还区分了改善现状的重要性和不恶化现状的重要性。通过对小组的输入进行汇总,可定义重要性相关参数的约束条件,然后将其用于稳健性和随机分析。在实际应用中,以法国某地区的胡萝卜种植为例,对病虫害综合防治(IPM)进行了比较。比较基于对当前做法和替代 IPM 系统的可持续性评估,使用的数据来自田间试验、实验室实验和利益相关者的偏好。结果对权重选择具有稳健性,从而确定了哪些变化是值得推荐的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Operations Research
Annals of Operations Research 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
596
审稿时长
8.4 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Operations Research publishes peer-reviewed original articles dealing with key aspects of operations research, including theory, practice, and computation. The journal publishes full-length research articles, short notes, expositions and surveys, reports on computational studies, and case studies that present new and innovative practical applications. In addition to regular issues, the journal publishes periodic special volumes that focus on defined fields of operations research, ranging from the highly theoretical to the algorithmic and the applied. These volumes have one or more Guest Editors who are responsible for collecting the papers and overseeing the refereeing process.
期刊最新文献
Leveraging interpretable machine learning in intensive care Correction: Power utility maximization with expert opinions at fixed arrival times in a market with hidden gaussian drift Designing resilient supply chain networks: a systematic literature review of mitigation strategies Data science and decision analytics Climbing university rankings under resources constraints: a combined approach integrating DEA and directed Louvain community detection
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1