Methods for comparing policies using multiple criteria: an urban example

Abstract

This paper looks at a variety of methods that can be used in evaluating a set of alternate policies using multiple criteria. The methods examined are the structural mapping of indifferences, utility values, lexicographic ordering, factor analysis, concordance analysis and multidimension scaling. Each method is tested using hypothetical data for a problem in which alternative policies are proposed for allocating monies to housing and health projects in a town. The aim is to try to reveal as objectively as possible, a set of preferred alternatives from which one can be chosen in the political decision-making process. After describing and testing the methods individually, they are compared both on the basis of their results and on the principles involved in their approach. Conclusions about the validity of each method are given, and it is emphasized that all methods should only be used as aids in the choice of an optimal policy.