Abstract
Abstract Recently, the use of multicriteria quantitative evaluation methods for solving social and economic problems has grown considerably. One of two major components of quantitative multicriteria evaluation methods strongly influencing the evaluation results is associated with the criteria weights. In practice, the criteria weights are determined in assessing the economic development of the state and its regions, the commercial activity and strategic potential of enterprises, the effectiveness of particular investment projects, etc. Several theoretical and practical methods of determining the significance (weight) of criteria by experts are known. Pairwise comparison of criteria is widely applied, and the most well‐known, widely applied and mathematically grounded technique is the so‐called Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). However, the application of this method is limited because of a great number of evaluation criteria, contradicting expert estimates and incompatible matrices obtained. In the presen...
Highlights
Social and economic problems associated with evaluation of social and economic development of states and regions, commercial activities and strategic potential of enterprises, as well as the comparison of investment projects based on their effectiveness, etc. are very complicated because of the specific nature of the considered phenomena
The present paper aims to help the users of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method to fill in questionnaires of pairwise comparison of criteria properly, to identify logical inconsistencies in the filled in forms and to eliminate them
Let us briefly describe the AHP approach. It was suggested by Saaty (1980) and called Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Summary
Social and economic problems associated with evaluation of social and economic development of states and regions, commercial activities and strategic potential of enterprises, as well as the comparison of investment projects based on their effectiveness, etc. are very complicated because of the specific nature of the considered phenomena. The main advantage of this approach is a possibility to compare the criteria in pairs rather than all at a time This method allows the conversion of qualitative estimates elicited from experts to quantitative estimates, implying that the values of the criteria weights can be calculated. It was suggested by Saaty (1980) and called Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) This method allows us to determine the weights (significances) of hierarchically non-structured or particular hierarchical level criteria in respect of those belonging to a higher level. In the first row of the table, the order of the comparison matrix is indicated, while, in the second row of the table, the average consistency index values are presented (Saaty 1980).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
