Steele Katie, Carmel Yohay, Cross Jean, Wilcox Chris
Australian Centre of Excellence for Risk Analysis (ACERA), Department of Philosophy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Risk Anal. 2009 Jan;29(1):26-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01130.x. Epub 2008 Sep 29.
We focus on a class of multicriteria methods that are commonly used in environmental decision making--those that employ the weighted linear average algorithm (and this includes the popular analytic hierarchy process (AHP)). While we do not doubt the potential benefits of using formal decision methods of this type, we draw attention to the consequences of not using them well. In particular, we highlight a property of these methods that should not be overlooked when they are applied in environmental and wider decision-making contexts: the final decision or ranking of options is dependent on the choice of performance scoring scales for the criteria when the criteria weights are held constant. We compare this "sensitivity" to a well-known criticism of the AHP, and we go on to describe the more general lesson when it comes to using weighted linear average methods--a lesson concerning the relationship between criteria weights and performance scoring scales.
我们关注一类在环境决策中常用的多标准方法——那些采用加权线性平均算法的方法（这包括流行的层次分析法（AHP））。虽然我们毫不怀疑使用这类形式化决策方法的潜在益处，但我们提请注意使用不当的后果。特别是，我们强调这些方法在应用于环境及更广泛决策背景时不应被忽视的一个特性：当标准权重保持不变时，选项的最终决策或排序取决于标准绩效评分量表的选择。我们将这种“敏感性”与对层次分析法的一个著名批评进行比较，并继续描述在使用加权线性平均方法时更普遍的教训——一个关于标准权重与绩效评分量表之间关系的教训。
