Exploratory MCDA for handling deep uncertainties: the case of intelligent speed adaptation implementation

Sometimes experts, decisionmakers, and analysts are confronted with policy problems that involve deep uncertainty. Such policy problems occur when (1) the future is not known well enough to predict future changes to the system, (2) there is not enough knowledge regarding the appropriate model to use to estimate the outcomes, and/or (3) there is not enough knowledge regarding the weights stakeholders currently assign to the various criteria or will assign in the future. This paper presents an MCDA approach developed to deal with conditions of deep uncertainty, which is called Exploratory Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (EMCDA). EMCDA is based on exploratory modelling, which is a modelling approach that allows policy analysts to explore multiple hypotheses about the future world (using different consequence models, different scenarios, and different weights). An example of a policy problem that can benefit from this methodology is decision making on innovations for improving traffic safety. In order to improve traffic safety, much is expected from Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA), an in-vehicle system that supports the driver in keeping an appropriate speed. However, different MCDA studies on ISA give different results in terms of the estimates of real-world safety benefits of ISA and the willingness of stakeholders (e.g. the automotive industry) to supply ISA. The application of EMCDA to the implementation of ISA shows that it is possible to perform an MCDA in situations of deep uncertainty. A full analysis taking into account the complete uncertainty space shows that the best policy is to make mandatory an ISA system for young drivers (less than 24 years of age) that restricts them from driving faster than the speed limit. Based on different assumptions, the analysis also shows that ISA policies should not target older drivers. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  B. Agusdinata,et al.  Exploratory modeling and analysis: a promising method to deal with deep uncertainty , 2008 .

[2]  James S. Hodges,et al.  Six (Or So) Things You Can Do with a Bad Model , 1991, Oper. Res..

[3]  W. Walker Policy analysis: a systematic approach to supporting policymaking in the public sector , 2000 .

[4]  Paul Goodwin,et al.  Enhancing Strategy Evaluation in Scenario Planning: a Role for Decision Analysis , 2001 .

[5]  Ingrid van Schagen,et al.  Driving speed and the risk of road crashes: a review. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  L. Alberto Franco,et al.  Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[7]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Multi-Criteria Analysis for Evaluating the Impacts of Intelligent Speed Adaptation , 2009 .

[8]  Hway-Liem Oei,et al.  Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) and road safety , 2002 .

[9]  Gilberto Montibeller,et al.  Combining scenario planning and multi-criteria decision analysis in practice , 2006 .

[10]  Warren E. Walker,et al.  Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support , 2003 .

[11]  Steven C Bankes,et al.  Tools and techniques for developing policies for complex and uncertain systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Simon French,et al.  Uncertainty and Imprecision: Modelling and Analysis , 1995 .

[13]  Amit Kanudia,et al.  Minimax regret strategies for greenhouse gas abatement: methodology and application , 1997, Oper. Res. Lett..

[14]  A. Várhelyi,et al.  The effects of in-car speed limiters – Field studies , 2001 .

[15]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Problem Structuring and Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis , 2010, Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis.

[16]  Karel Brookhuis,et al.  Speed Support Through the Intelligent Vehicle: Perspective, Estimated Effects and Implementation Aspects , 2007 .

[17]  J. Rosenhead,et al.  Robustness and Optimality as Criteria for Strategic Decisions , 1972 .

[18]  R. Neufville Real Options: Dealing With Uncertainty in Systems Planning and Design , 2003 .

[19]  L. Alberto Franco,et al.  Taking problem structuring methods forward , 2007, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[20]  Lars Åberg,et al.  The long term effects of an ISA speed-warning device on drivers’ speeding behaviour , 2008 .

[21]  Warren E. Walker,et al.  Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[22]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  The multi‐actor, multi‐criteria analysis methodology (MAMCA) for the evaluation of transport projects: Theory and practice , 2009 .

[23]  L. Alberto Franco,et al.  Problem structuring methods: new directions in a problematic world , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[24]  S. Underwood,et al.  A MULTIATTRIBUTE ANALYSIS OF GOALS FOR INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLANNING , 1996 .

[25]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies: introduction to section 2 , 2010 .

[26]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Scenario-based multi-criteria decision analysis , 2010 .

[27]  R. Lempert,et al.  Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative Long-Term Policy Analysis , 2003 .

[28]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Dealing With Uncertainty in Implementing Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: An Adaptive Approach , 2003 .

[29]  David G. Groves,et al.  A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[30]  D. Yagil Gender and age-related differences in attitudes toward traffic laws and traffic violations , 1998 .

[31]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Planning under Uncertainty: II. A Methodology for Robustness Analysis , 1980 .

[32]  Steve Bankes,et al.  Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis , 1993, Oper. Res..

[33]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Dynamic adaptive transport policies for handling deep uncertainty , 2010 .