Speakers
Description
In the digital age, it is crucial to reflect on the role and relevance of urban structuring and decision-support methods.
The overall aim of SUITE research (Decision support in an urban context in the digital age: interactions and uncertainties) is to explore this issue, through a main research question: is the concept of Problem Structuring Methods (PSMs)(Rosenhead and Mingers, 2001; Shaw et al., 2006) and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) (Greco et al., 2016; Munda, 2019) still relevant in a world accelerated by technology and digital innovation?
This research takes a firm and substantiated stance on its relevance: structuring and decision support methods are still significant, but contextual conditions, in particular the digital revolution, may have changed the way they are to be used and the purpose for which they are applied, and this is exactly what we want to focus on. This research intends to investigate, within a decision-making process, the affordances enabled by the use of a specific artifact, a new software called Multi-Values Appraisal Methodology (MuVAM) created on a multi-methodological approach recently introduced in the literature (Lami and Todella, 2023). MuVAM combines the Strategic Choice Approach (Friend and Hickling, 1987, 2005) with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (Saaty, 1980), and it is based on cloud-based technologies, which allow synchronized and connected use, digitally and also in asynchronous mode.
The study investigates the contribution of the software to group interaction and the development of a “Plural Subject” through the analysis of eight workshops, held in four different European countries, in three languages (English, French and Italian) and on four different case studies, all related to sustainable urban development. In particular, the applications differed with respect to: i) the scale of intervention, ranging from the planning of an entire city area to that of a university campus; ii) the outcome, which in most cases concerned the definition of a master plan. Interestingly, the participants in the workshops were also quite diverse: Bachelor's, Master's, PhD and Lifelong Learning Master's degree students, with a varied experience in terms of educational level and background. Feedback from the workshops was collected through a report or a Google survey, through a series of questions covering both group dynamics and individual choices.
References
Friend, J.K., Hickling, A. (1987) Planning under pressure: The strategic choice approach. Oxford.
Friend, J.K., Hickling, A. (2005) Planning under pressure: The strategic choice approach (3rd Ed). London-New York: Routledge.
Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Figueira, J. (2016) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, Springer, New York, 2016.
Lami, I.M., Todella, E. (2023) A multi-methodological combination of the strategic choice approach and the analytic network process: from facts to values and vice versa. European Journal of Operational Research, 307(2), pp. 802–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.10.029
Munda, G. (2019). Multi-Criteria Evaluation in Public Economics and Policy. In
M. Doumpos, J. Figueira, S. Greco, & C. Zopounidis (Eds.), New perspectives
in multiple criteria decision making. multiple criteria decision making. Cham:
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11482-4_11.
Rosenhead J, Mingers J (eds) (2001) Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited: problem structuring methods for complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Wiley, Chichester.
Saaty, T.L. (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Shaw, D., Franco, A., Westcombe, M. (2006) Problem structuring methods: new directions in a problematic world. Journal of the Operational Research Society 57, 757–758. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602193
| Keywords | PSMs; MCDA; Multi-Values Appraisal Methodology (MuVAM); digital innovation; urban transformations |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
