Content uploaded by Patrick Harker
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Patrick Harker on Jul 09, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Art and Science of Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Abstract
This paper presents an overview of the philosophy and methodology which underlies the Analytic Hierarchy Process. After introducing the method through a series of examples, the theoretical basis of the method is described along with a summary of its mathematical underpinnings. Several recent methodological extensions are also described along with a brief description of several major and illustrative applications. The paper concludes with a summary of the progress to date in the continuing development and application of this important decision-aiding methodology.
... In agricultural research solitary prioritization studies of AHP applications are available, these are-technology choice by Ramanujam and Saaty (1981), biotechnology project selection in Chile by Braunschweig (2000), and resource allocation in agricultural research and development by Rohrback and Pingsun (1991). Other research papers available on AHP applications in agriculture mostly describe AHP methodology on the basis of hypothetical examples (Harker, 1989;Hartwich and Janssen, 2000) the actual studies are less available (Braunschweig, 2000). Plenty of AHP based prioritization studies are available in other management subjects such as-finance, marketing (Anderson et al., 2000), industrial project selection (Dey, 2002), information system project selection (Schniederjans and Wilson, 1991, and academic areas like career choice (Canada et al., 1985), and performance evaluation (Chan and Lynn, 1991). ...
... Potential solutions (these are broad research alternatives and not synonymous with research projects) and criteria were short listed at village level study. Harker (1989) suggest this approach for convenience of pair-wise comparisons through AHP. Randolph et al. (2001) believe that already developed framework (in present research work the 'participatory case study' perform this function) make AHP more relevant, such provisions of case study also offer a scenario for the decision makers. ...
... It is observed that some issues of limitations of AHP discussed by various scientists such as 'its time consuming' (Hartwich and Janssen, 2000) 'tiresome task of pair-wise comparisons and keeping consistency' (Davey and Olson, 1998) are reduced by short listing of criteria and researchable options at the farmers' level. Therefore followed two stage process i.e. design stage and evaluation stage; such an approach is in consultation with Harker (1989). Field study reports are found to bridge the gap between farmers and scientists as reported by Randolph et al. (2001), who opine that already developed framework helped in more relevance of AHP. ...
Agricultural scientists of various cadres were trained in analytic hierarchy process (AHP); later in interdisciplinary groups they prioritized the research interventions for solving the problem as given to them through a 'participatory case study' of a village. This case study is the abstracted draft report of the two agro-ecosystem field studies separately conducted by International Center for development oriented Research in Agriculture (ICRA), The Netherlands and National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM) in collaboration with Indian Grassland & Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), a locally situated institution. First one is divergent and broad study of complete region, and second one is convergent and specific constraint-opportunity analysis of a village in zone-3 of ICRA study. The paper describes perceptions of off-site and on-site scientists of various cadres towards AHP, its application and analysis of prioritized group decisions.
... In agricultural research solitary prioritization studies of AHP applications are available, these are-technology choice by Ramanujam and Saaty (1981), biotechnology project selection in Chile by Braunschweig (2000), and resource allocation in agricultural research and development by Rohrback and Pingsun (1991). Other research papers available on AHP applications in agriculture mostly describe AHP methodology on the basis of hypothetical examples (Harker, 1989;Hartwich and Janssen, 2000) the actual studies are less available (Braunschweig, 2000). Plenty of AHP based prioritization studies are available in other management subjects such as-finance, marketing (Anderson et al., 2000), industrial project selection (Dey, 2002), information system project selection (Schniederjans and Wilson, 1991, and academic areas like career choice (Canada et al., 1985), and performance evaluation (Chan and Lynn, 1991). ...
... Potential solutions (these are broad research alternatives and not synonymous with research projects) and criteria were short listed at village level study. Harker (1989) suggest this approach for convenience of pair-wise comparisons through AHP. Randolph et al. (2001) believe that already developed framework (in present research work the 'participatory case study' perform this function) make AHP more relevant, such provisions of case study also offer a scenario for the decision makers. ...
... It is observed that some issues of limitations of AHP discussed by various scientists such as 'its time consuming' (Hartwich and Janssen, 2000) 'tiresome task of pair-wise comparisons and keeping consistency' (Davey and Olson, 1998) are reduced by short listing of criteria and researchable options at the farmers' level. Therefore followed two stage process i.e. design stage and evaluation stage; such an approach is in consultation with Harker (1989). Field study reports are found to bridge the gap between farmers and scientists as reported by Randolph et al. (2001), who opine that already developed framework helped in more relevance of AHP. ...
Agricultural scientists of various cadres were trained in analytic hierarchy process (AHP); later in interdisciplinary groups they prioritized the research interventions for solving the problem as given to them through a 'participatory case study' of a village. This case study is the abstracted draft report of the two agro-ecosystem field studies separately conducted by International Center for development oriented Research in Agriculture (ICRA), The Netherlands and National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM) in collaboration with Indian Grassland & Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), a locally situated institution. First one is divergent and broad study of complete region, and second one is convergent and specific constraint-opportunity analysis of a village in zone-3 of ICRA study. The paper describes perceptions of off-site and on-site scientists of various cadres towards AHP, its application and analysis of prioritized group decisions.
... In a clinical setting, MCDA can facilitate decision-making processes and encourage informed and shared decision making by helping patients think critically about all available options and their unique characteristics. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a MCDA technique that breaks a decision problem into a hierarchical structure and allows a decision maker to focus on one aspect of a complex decision at a time [14]. The AHP also enables one to quantify preferences for decision alternatives and the criteria on which those preferences are based. ...
... Overall, participants made 3 × 7 = 21 direct comparisons for the 3 decision alternatives and 7 criteria/ sub-criteria (Test effectiveness, follow-up possibility, frequency of testing, possibility of complications, convenience, preparation, and procedure). We used direct comparisons on decision alternatives to reduce respondent burden and eliminate the risk of rank reversal [14]. We presented direct comparisons in randomized order using the Qualtrics question randomization feature. ...
... The AHP procedure is not created for or intended to replace traditional decision-making processes but to provide additional information that can be used to facilitate the process of thinking through complex decisions. In a healthcare setting, this process would enable patients to come to a clinic appointment better informed, more ready to ask important questions, and ultimately, make a decision that they are satisfied with [14]. For the remaining 40% of participants who provided discordant preferences, there could be criteria that we did not include in the hierarchy or other beliefs about the screening strategies that influenced participants' judgments that were otherwise not factored into our AHP model, and these warrant further investigation. ...
Abstract Background In 2021, the United States Preventive Services Task Force updated their recommendation, stating that individuals ages 45-49 should initiate screening for colorectal cancer. Since several screening strategies are recommended, making a shared decision involves including an individual’s preferences. Few studies have included individuals under age 50. In this study, we use a multicriteria decision analysis technique called the Analytic Hierarchy Process to explore preferences for screening strategies and evaluate whether preferences vary by age. Methods Participants evaluated a hierarchy with 3 decision alternatives (colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test, and computed tomography colonography), 3 criteria (test effectiveness, the screening plan, and features of the test) and 7 sub-criteria. We used the linear fit method to calculate consistency ratios and the eigenvector method for group preferences. We conducted sensitivity analysis to assess whether results are robust to change and tested differences in preferences by participant variables using chi-square and analysis of variance. Results Of the 579 individuals surveyed, 556 (96%) provided complete responses to the AHP portion of the survey. Of these, 247 participants gave responses consistent enough (CR
... • This is the only MCDM technique that has an effective mechanism for checking the uniformity of weightage established by the decision-maker, and thus, it does not necessitate the decision-maker to be unnaturally consistent [15]. ...
The AHP technique was expanded by Saaty (1980) and called Analytic Hierarchy Process. It is a usual way of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) since it is based on theoretical authority. It has a great ability to solve complex problems throughout the decision-making process in any domain .This method, which reflects natural behavior and human thinking, authorize the decision maker to present the interaction between different criteria in complex and unstructured situations. The AHP method is employed to recognize the consistency of weightings for each criterion, which it works by constructing a pair-wise comparisons matrix. The aim of this chapter is to examine this method in detail in a tangible example for the field of the environment (landfilling). For obtaining this aim, an important criterion that can influence the environment was considered by using geometric integration in Expert Choice with merging the AHP technique and GIS software.
... Organising objectives, alternatives, and criteria into a multi-level hierarchical structure, the AHP was developed by Saaty [54][55][56], and enjoys popular application as a decision support system [57]. Such a system is almost inevitable, as the process of decision-making in real life often requires assessing multiple alternatives in relation to various criteria and sub-criteria [58,59]. ...
Many service delivery performance assessment (SDPA) tools exist globally that address the need to measure actual performance against pre-defined standards and to take corrective action to improve service delivery. The purpose of this paper is to guide the selection of the most appropriate SDPA tool for South Africa. Given the overwhelming civic unrest linked to public service performance levels, a solution is needed urgently. This study therefore presents a scientific approach to the process of deciding on a shortlist of off-the-shelf solutions, based on the criteria of effectiveness, project, and technical, so that a decision on the most appropriate tool for South Africa can be made on the basis of the synthesised results and a sensitivity analysis. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used, and the performance journey mapping (PJM) tool has been selected on the basis of criteria and sub-criteria that were also validated for their practicality.
... It is thus easier for a decision-maker to carry out binary comparisons than to take into account all the parameters of the problem. The AHP method constitutes a powerful and flexible tool of decision-making for complex multicriterial problems in which quantitative and qualitative aspects must be built in (Harker, 1989;Moretti et al., 2017). Using a statistical analysis per pair of comparisons, the ten local experts' opinions were used to determine the weight of the factors of evaluation of the grounds' aptitude. ...
Developing a Land Suitability Model for Cereals in the Algerian Sahara Using GIS and Hierarchical Multicriteria Analysis. Int. J. Agric. Nat. Resour. 36-50. Determining land suitability is a preliminary procedure to define and determine land fitness for a given type of production. A suitability analysis performed with inadequate methods will not guarantee a successful or significant process. The current attempt to consider new strategies and techniques for the Algerian agricultural systems comes as a part of a process of reflection that aims to understand the land resource planning process for agriculture, specifically in Ouargla, Algeria. The aim of the study is also to present a process that is based on the use of geographic information systems (GIS) and hierarchical multicriteria analysis; this process has demonstrated its relevance to the understanding of complex spatial problems. The suggested approach provides an information reference for the construction of soil suitability maps for cereals in N'Goussa at Ouargla. Farming factors, such as the slope, soil characteristics, electrical and road networks, and land occupation, were integrated into the soil suitability map for cereals by using the geographic information system. Multiplying the weighted coefficients linked to these factors allows for a global land suitability map. The obtained results allow for the prioritization of the sites into four classes: high suitability, moderate suitability, low suitability and unsuitability. In fact, 60.06% of the total area is moderately suitable for cereals.
p>Poor performance of existing irrigation schemes has been well documented. Increased world population and competition with other uses of water require that irrigation schemes be better managed and more productive. One of the main causes of poor performance is the low expenditure on irrigation infrastructure due to the limited financial resources of developing countries, where the majority of irrigated agriculture exist. Consequently, irrigation systems are failing well within their design lifetime, wasting the large capital investments made in their construction.
In addition there is an increasing interest in the long-term performance of irrigation schemes, and in expenditure and asset management planning to ensure sustained levels of service. At present, no complete methodology or procedure exists for linking the expenditure on irrigation infrastructure to improvement in system performance. Such methodology is paramount for planning efficient expenditures which, when made, should sustain the level of performance/service of irrigation systems as expected by their beneficiaries, at least cost possible.
A methodology for linking irrigation system performance to structure and conveyance system condition has been developed in this research. It enables different expenditure options to be considered and assessed, which is an essential element of any asset management planning tool. The methodology uses hydraulic modelling techniques as its main analytical tool besides performance assessment and cost-benefit analysis. Approaches of multi-criteria analysis are used to aggregate the various hydraulic performance and other criteria used to evaluate expenditure alternatives into overall performance scores.
The development of the methodology was achieved through the investigation of some common and important infrastructure-related problems. Two main problems related to canal networks and regulator structures were investigated on a real-life case study using hydraulic modelling. Procedures for quantifying the impacts of each problem and analysing the possible alternatives for curing them are presented. The research shows that the developed methodology has been successful as a planning and decision aid tool in analysing the expenditure alternatives of the cases studied. Nevertheless, the methodology is not limited to these two cases only. General procedures for analysing any infrastructure-related problem which affects hydraulic performance are also outlined.</p
The problem of municipal solid waste treatment and disposal is increasing day by day in rural areas due to the surging levels of solid waste which is attributed to the population increase, growing consumerism, changing lifestyles, etc. Due to the rising health and environmental concerns, there is a need to treat this municipal solid waste in a responsible manner. A large number of solid waste treatment options are available for decision-makers to choose from however the selection of an appropriate solid waste treatment method for a particular area is a challenging task as it requires trade-off between a pool of economic, environmental, social, and technical criteria. In recent decades, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) has emerged as a convenient tool to address such challenging decision-making problems. This paper highlights the application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a multi-criteria decision-making technique, in the selection of the most suitable solid waste treatment method in the context of rural areas. Three alternatives viz. Anaerobic Digestion, Vermicomposting, and Windrow Composting are evaluated against 10 criteria to obtain the priorities of the alternatives. In AHP, the final priorities of alternatives can be synthesized in two different modes: Distributive mode and Ideal mode. In this paper also, both the modes have been used and their results are compared. In both the modes, Anaerobic Digestion emerged as the most appropriate solid waste treatment method for the selected study area. To check the robustness of the results obtained, a sensitivity analysis has also been performed by adopting a scenario-based approach.
Here we introduce the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a method of measurement with ratio scales and illustrate it with two examples. We then give the axioms and some of the central theoretical underpinnings of the theory. Finally, we discuss some of the ideas relating to this process and its ramifications. In this paper we give special emphasis to departure from consistency and its measurement and to the use of absolute and relative measurement, providing examples and justification for rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement.
This chapter provides an overview of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which is a systematic procedure for representing the elements of any problem hierarchically. It organizes the basic rationality by breaking down a problem into its smaller constituent parts and then guides decision makers through a series of pair-wise comparison judgments to express the relative strength or intensity of impact of the elements in the hierarchy. These judgments are then translated to numbers. The AHP includes procedures and principles used to synthesize the many judgments to derive priorities among criteria and subsequently for alternative solutions. It is useful to note that the numbers thus obtained are ratio scale estimates and correspond to so-called hard numbers. Problem solving is a process of setting priorities in steps. One step decides on the most important elements of a problem, another on how best to repair, replace, test, and evaluate the elements, and another on how to implement the solution and measure performance.
Since its introduction in the mid 1970s, the Analytic Hierarchy Process has been applied to many types of decision problems. In this paper, we identify more than 150 published papers that use the AHP to model diverse problems and we categorize each paper according to 29 application areas that range from conflict analysis to urban planning. In addition, we classify papers that combine the AHP with some traditional operations research techniques (e.g., linear programming) to analyze alternatives. Finally, in order to convey both the practicality and impact of this technique, we annotate 17 papers that either model important, real-world problems or apply the AHP in an interesting or unusual setting.
We discuss several conditions which are reasonable requirements for functions synthesizing either ratio or measure judgements (or both) and determine all synthesizing functions satisfying either shorter or longer lists of such assumptions (yielding more general or more specific synthesizing procedures, respectively).
Three methods—the eigenvalue, logarithmic least squares, and least squares methods—used to derive estimates of ratio scales from a positive reciprocal matrix are analyzed. The criteria for comparison are the measurement of consistency, dual solutions, and rank preservation. It is shown that the eigenvalue procedure, which is metric-free, leads to a structural index for measuring inconsistency, has two separate dual interpretations and is the only method that guarantees rank preservation under inconsistency conditions.
In his first book on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, T. L. Saaty left open several mathematical questions about the structure of the set of positive reciprocal matrices. In this paper we consider three of these questions: Given an eigenvector and all matrices which give rise to it, can one go from one of them to any order by making small perturbations in the entries? Given two positive column vectors v and w is there a perturbation which carries the set of all positive reciprocal matrices with principal right eigenvector v to the set of positive reciprocal matrices with principal right eigenvector w? Does the set of positive reciprocal n×n matrices whose left and right principal eigenvectors are reciprocals coincide with the set of consistent matrices for n⩾4?
A method is developed to estimate the average opinion (or core) of a group of people. The method elicits judgments from a smaller group of individuals than the total population. What we obtain is a scattering of values around a core value that is being estimated. Some of those values will be closer to the core and others will lie away from it. The method presented here allows us, given the density of concentration of the judgments, to use to a greater extent those values closer to the core. The method generates a surface which is more like a probability distribution that can be used to estimate the core without treating the data as if it were direct estimates of it. The shape of the distribution that we have shown to be the relevant one is that corresponding to a Dirichlet distribution. Here we show that the only distribution of judgments which yields this type of result is the gamma distribution. Under the assumption of total consistency, if the judgments are gamma distributed, the principal right-eigenvector of the resulting reciprocal matrix of pairwise comparisons is Dirichlet distributed. If the assumption of consistency is relaxed, then the hypothesis that the principal right-eigenvector follows a Dirichlet distribution is accepted if inconsistency is 10% or less.
This paper briefly reviews the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and its applications in diverse decision problems. It addresses some of the major extensions and criticisms of the method, as well.
Decision Making for Leaders is an introduction to Saaty's analytic hierarchy process (AHP) aimed at an audience of leaders in business, industry, and government. As such, the book can be viewed as a popularized version of Saaty's more technical works on AHP (for example, see [1]).