Future-sketching and multi-attribute evaluation may affect your preference order of complex policy scenarios

Abstract

A total of 158 citizens from Groningen and surrounding villages evaluated summary descriptions of four different policy scenarios (A-D) for metropolitan traffic in the next decades. Eighty subjects rank-ordered the scenarios following a multi-attribute evaluation method. The other 78 subjects provided an 'intuitive' rank-ordering. Of each group, half of the subjects did and the other half did not sketch their expected future consequences of each scenario. Multi-attribute evaluation of policy scenarios yielded a greater consensus among subjects and it led to another mean preference order than did intuitive evaluation. Of all preference orderings, 138 (87%) could be unfolded into one J(oint)-scale ranging from the 'alternative-friendly' scenario D to the 'car-friendly' scenario A. Individual subjects' ideal points and corresponding individual preference orders fell into seven different categories along this J-scale. Subgroups holding the seven preference orders significantly differed in traffic problem awareness, annual car-kilometrage and the percentage of multi-attribute evaluators. It is concluded that multi-attribute evaluation of complex preference objects may guide subjects towards greater consensus and towards another preference ranking than when policy scenarios are evaluated intuitively. This may be mediated by the set of value attributes used, whose structure of intercorrelations may reflect (or induce) a simple(r) preference foundation. The results are interpreted in terms of cognitive elaboration of choice alternatives which serves the construction of preferences about them. The importance of good 'scenario thinking' for complex policy making is emphasized. (C) 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.