Desirability–doability group judgment framework for the collaborative multicriteria evaluation of public policies

Abstract

AbstractDesirability–doability framework (2 × D) is a novel framework for the collaborative evaluation of public policies. Fundamental objectives and performance indicators are agreed upon in workshops, policies are characterised, and barriers to implementation identified. MACBETH interactive protocols are then applied in decision conferences to elicit qualitative judgments about the desirability of policies, within and across objectives; and about their doability under the expected graveness of barriers on contrasting scenarios. Elicited judgments allow, respectively, to construct a shared multicriteria model measuring the overall desirability of policies; and, to measure their doability. Desirability–doability graphs enable visual interactive classification of policies, with sensitivity/robustness analyses of uncertainties. 2 × D was successfully tested in a real‐world urban‐health policymaking case to evaluate spatial policies. The main novelty of 2 × D is that it bridges the socio‐technical gap, present in OR, between the support required by a complex social decision‐making process, and that usually offered by analytic techniques – while keeping modeling theoretically sound and simple.