Abstract This paper suggests a framework to improve the quality of investment decisions in petroleum exploration. The proposed model enables the decision-maker to consider explicitly three major objectives when evaluating new petroleum ventures—financial, environmental and technological gain. The MultiAttribute Utility Theory (MAUT) provides a logical mean of decision for conflicting objectives. The MAUT is based on the risk preference of the firm, combining the objectives in the unique additive or multiplicative model. A high-dimensional sensitivity analysis technique is used for evaluating the weights of multicriteria decision models. The main advantage of this approach is that it allows a better simultaneous change of the weights and provides indications for a robustness control. The weights are obtained by a random process and are hierarchically adjusted using the analyst preferences. This paper proposes a study case comparing the application of this methodology in exploration projects located at five different offshore oil provinces in the Brazilian Continental Shelf. The MAUT methodology presented in this work demonstrates that, in some mature areas, the advantages of exploration are restricted only to financial gain. On the other hand, other seemingly less attractive areas, such as deep horizons in deep-water basins, may represent attractive targets for new exploration as a result of the interaction of technological advancement, and financial and market factors. The proposed approach allows the investigation of sensitivity for several options and alternatives. It also provides a rational tool for managers to make decisions according to firm preferences and objectives in complex oil prospects.
[1]
John C. Butler,et al.
Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models
,
1997
.
[2]
Saul B. Suslick,et al.
SERFIT: an algorithm to forecast mineral trends
,
1995
.
[3]
W. Edwards,et al.
Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research
,
1986
.
[4]
A. Tversky,et al.
Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) :
,
2007
.
[5]
Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.
On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods
,
2001,
Eur. J. Oper. Res..
[6]
M. R. Walls.
Corporate risk tolerance and capital allocation: a practical approach to implementing an exploration risk policy
,
1995
.
[7]
Ronald A. Howard,et al.
Decision analysis: practice and promise
,
1988
.
[8]
J. G. Higgins.
Planning for risk and uncertainty in oil exploration
,
1993
.
[9]
R. L. Keeney,et al.
Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs
,
1977,
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.
[10]
James S. Dyer,et al.
Risk Propensity and Firm Performance: A Study of the Petroleum Exploration Industry
,
1996
.
[11]
C. C. Waid,et al.
An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models
,
1982
.
[12]
Joseph Paul Martino,et al.
Technological Forecasting for Decisionmaking
,
1975
.
[13]
R. F. Heinemann,et al.
Quantifying the Value of Exploration And Producing Technology
,
1998
.