|
Valentin Bertsch, Otto Rentz, & Jutta Geldermann. (2007). Preference elicitation and sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria group decision support for nuclear remediation management. In K. Nieuwenhuis P. B. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Intelligent Human Computer Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM 2007 Academic Proceedings Papers (pp. 395–404). Delft: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: The resolution of complex decision situations in crisis and remediation management following a man-made or natural emergency usually requires input from different disciplines and fields of expertise. Contributing to transparency and traceability of decisions and taking subjective preferences into account, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is suitable to involve various stakeholder and expert groups in the decision making process who may have diverse background knowledge and different views, responsibilities and interests. The focus of this paper is to highlight the role of MCDA in nuclear emergency and remediation management on the basis of a hypothetical case study. Special emphasis is placed on the modelling of the decision makers' preferences. The aim is to explore the sensitivity of decision processes to simultaneous variations of the subjective preference parameters and consequently to contribute to a facilitation of the preference modelling process by comprehensibly visualising and communicating the impact of the preferential uncertainties on the results of the decision analysis.
|
|
|
Willem J. Muhren, Damir Durbic, & Bartel A. Van De Walle. (2010). Exploring decision-relevant information pooling by humanitarian disaster response teams. In C. Zobel B. T. S. French (Ed.), ISCRAM 2010 – 7th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management: Defining Crisis Management 3.0, Proceedings. Seattle, WA: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: It is a well-known fact that a lack of information will lead to suboptimal decisions. But even when actors jointly have all the information they need to make a well-informed decision, they may fail to find a superior alternative. This hidden profile paradigm would cause misrepresentations of crisis situations and lead to ineffective response. In this research-in-progress paper, we present the first stage of our experimental study on group decision making in humanitarian disaster response, in which we want to find out how teams can be supported to share more information, make better sense, and ultimately avoid such misrepresentations of crisis situations. First results reveal that humanitarian disaster response teams are able to share significantly more information if they would make use of more advanced information and communication systems. However, none of the teams in the experimental setup managed to find the optimal decision.
|
|