Analytic hierarchy process and sensitivity analysis implementation for social vulnerability assessment: A case study from Brazil

IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Pub Date : 2022-03-30 DOI:10.1002/mcda.1782
Ileana Grave, Luis A. Bojórquez-Tapia, Alejandra Estrada-Barón, Donald R. Nelson, Hallie Eakin
{"title":"Analytic hierarchy process and sensitivity analysis implementation for social vulnerability assessment: A case study from Brazil","authors":"Ileana Grave,&nbsp;Luis A. Bojórquez-Tapia,&nbsp;Alejandra Estrada-Barón,&nbsp;Donald R. Nelson,&nbsp;Hallie Eakin","doi":"10.1002/mcda.1782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One major challenge of social impact assessment concerns the implementation of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to ascertain the vulnerability of households to environmental change. While MCDA has been widely used to combine vulnerability indicators into an aggregated vulnerability score, the sensitivity of vulnerability indices to uncertain appraisals and judgements of the magnitudes and weights of indicators has been largely ignored so far. In this work, based on vulnerability indicators previously selected and ranked using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique, for household Brazil surveys carried out in 1998 and 2012, a sensitivity analysis (SA) was implemented to account for the variation of vulnerability indicators over time and space. In particular, two techniques were applied: the indicator removal and the threshold value tests. The indicator removal test involved setting to zero a particular indicator weight and rescaling the remaining indicator weights linearly. The threshold value test aimed to identify which indicators had the most relative influence on both indices. Finally, the critical threshold value showed the most important vulnerability indicators and allowed to summarise and contrast the standardized scores differences of the indicators between the two surveys. The results showed which indicators were the most important in increasing or decreasing the vulnerability and improved the understanding of how the overall vulnerability of rainfed farming households changed through time as a function of changes in sensitivity and adaptive capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":45876,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","volume":"29 5-6","pages":"381-392"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One major challenge of social impact assessment concerns the implementation of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to ascertain the vulnerability of households to environmental change. While MCDA has been widely used to combine vulnerability indicators into an aggregated vulnerability score, the sensitivity of vulnerability indices to uncertain appraisals and judgements of the magnitudes and weights of indicators has been largely ignored so far. In this work, based on vulnerability indicators previously selected and ranked using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique, for household Brazil surveys carried out in 1998 and 2012, a sensitivity analysis (SA) was implemented to account for the variation of vulnerability indicators over time and space. In particular, two techniques were applied: the indicator removal and the threshold value tests. The indicator removal test involved setting to zero a particular indicator weight and rescaling the remaining indicator weights linearly. The threshold value test aimed to identify which indicators had the most relative influence on both indices. Finally, the critical threshold value showed the most important vulnerability indicators and allowed to summarise and contrast the standardized scores differences of the indicators between the two surveys. The results showed which indicators were the most important in increasing or decreasing the vulnerability and improved the understanding of how the overall vulnerability of rainfed farming households changed through time as a function of changes in sensitivity and adaptive capacity.

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
社会脆弱性评价的层次分析法与敏感性分析实施——以巴西为例
社会影响评估的一个主要挑战是执行多标准决策分析,以确定家庭对环境变化的脆弱性。虽然MCDA已被广泛用于将脆弱性指标组合成一个综合脆弱性评分,但迄今为止,脆弱性指标对不确定评价的敏感性以及对指标大小和权重的判断在很大程度上被忽略了。在这项工作中,基于先前使用层次分析法(AHP)技术选择和排名的脆弱性指标,对1998年和2012年进行的巴西家庭调查进行了敏感性分析(SA),以解释脆弱性指标随时间和空间的变化。具体而言,应用了两种技术:指标去除和阈值测试。指标移除测试涉及将特定指标权重设置为零,并线性地重新调整剩余指标权重。阈值检验旨在确定哪些指标对两个指标的相对影响最大。最后,临界阈值显示了最重要的脆弱性指标,并可以总结和对比两次调查中指标的标准化得分差异。结果显示了哪些指标对脆弱性的增加或减少最为重要,并提高了对雨养农户整体脆弱性如何随时间变化的理解,作为敏感性和适应能力变化的函数。
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
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis was launched in 1992, and from the outset has aimed to be the repository of choice for papers covering all aspects of MCDA/MCDM. The journal provides an international forum for the presentation and discussion of all aspects of research, application and evaluation of multi-criteria decision analysis, and publishes material from a variety of disciplines and all schools of thought. Papers addressing mathematical, theoretical, and behavioural aspects are welcome, as are case studies, applications and evaluation of techniques and methodologies.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A Bibliometric Exploration of Multiple Criteria Decision Aid and Clustering—A Conceptual Taxonomy Monitoring Sustainable Development Goals: Stepwise Benchmarking Approach Charting the evolutionary conceptual pathway of analytic network process research: A main path analysis Socio-economic strategy for settlement of refugees amidst crisis: The case of Pak-Afghan
×
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