Multi-actor Multi-criteria Analysis Research Articles

20 years review of the multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) framework: a proposition of a systematic guideline

AbstractMulti-criteria Decision Making (MCDM) involves evaluating alternatives based on a comprehensive set of conflicting criteria, often requiring the involvement of varied decision makers. This has led to the emergence of stakeholder-based multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) frameworks. However, traditional MCGDM frequently overlooks the interactions and trade-offs among different actors and criteria. The Multi-actor Multi-criteria Analysis (MAMCA), developed in 2000, provides a transparent decision-making process explicitly considering these interrelationships. It allows diverse stakeholder groups to represent their priorities, thereby enhancing their understanding of their own and others’ positions. Over the past two decades, MAMCA has seen a significant rise in popularity and has been widely applied in diverse contexts, proving valuable as both a decision-making and stakeholder engagement tool. However, our analysis of publications on cases in which MAMCA was applied over the years shows that considerable variation exists in the overall process approach, contingent upon the specific goals and context. To address these variations, this paper proposes a modularized MAMCA structure, complemented by systematic application guidelines, to aid future users in navigating the process steps and identifying the most suitable methods for each step. Additionally, future research directions are suggested for potential enhancements to the MAMCA framework by integrating varied methodologies.

Application of the MAMCA Method in the Evaluation of Delivery Flows within City Centers: A Case Study of Rijeka

The aim of this paper was to propose a model for the evaluation of the flow of goods delivered to urban centers based on a systematic approach, generating possible scenarios of delivery activities and selecting those criteria for evaluation that contributed to the development of delivery activities and their evaluation by individual stakeholders. The number of users of delivery services is increasing, which leads to an increase in the volume of goods in the city center, creating additional traffic congestion—so-called bottlenecks—which results in an increased noise level and the emission of harmful exhaust gases, increasing dissatisfaction with the quality of life of the city population. It is, therefore, necessary for decision-makers to make a decision that achieves the best consensus among stakeholders. A test was carried out in the city of Rijeka. Based on a review of the literature and the spatial planning of the city of Rijeka, this paper proposed the following possible scenarios for the delivery of goods within the city center: status quo, delivery from one consolidation center, delivery from two consolidation centers, delivery by environmentally friendly vehicles from one consolidation center and livability. The criteria were evaluated by relevant stakeholders to determine the weight of each criterion for the development of goods deliveries in the city center. This paper used a multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) based on the optimization and ranking of scenarios in accordance with the given objective, the research problem, the defined criteria and the interests of the stakeholders. The solution of the MAMCA analysis evaluated the scenario with two consolidation centers best in accordance with the specified optimization objective.

The MAMCABM framework for the evaluation of mobility decision‐making problems: theory and practice

AbstractIn the constantly evolving transportation and mobility industry, objective and reliable decision‐support systems (DSS) are crucial for addressing complex issues such as transit planning, mode selection, and policy formulation. This paper presents multiactor multicriteria analysis plus agent‐based modeling (MAMCABM), a novel framework that combines multiactor multicriteria analysis (MAMCA) and agent‐based modeling (ABM) to provide a comprehensive DSS. MAMCA excels in facilitating stakeholder‐centric evaluations, while ABM, enhanced by data analytics, adeptly models intricate, interactive systems. The combination of MAMCA and ABM enhances adaptability and precision in decision making. This integration utilizes data analytics and optimization algorithms to provide solutions that consider multifaceted criteria and diverse stakeholder perspectives in dynamic and uncertain contexts. The study outlines the mathematical underpinnings of MAMCABM and offers a practical guide for its implementation. The framework's efficacy is demonstrated through an empirical investigation that addresses mobility challenges in the Brussels Capital Region of Belgium. Compared to the previous study, this approach leverages simulated quantitative data alongside qualitative judgments from stakeholders. The integration of a consensus‐reaching algorithm further enhances the robustness of outcomes and effectively addresses uncertainties.

A comparative multidimensional evaluation of parameters and alternatives for transformation of sustainable cement production in Pakistan

The United Nations has declared its latest climate report a ‘code red,’ sounding the alarm and prompting a global call for scientists and policymakers to adopt comprehensive, systems-wide integrated strategies for promoting sustainable life on Earth. The need for collaborative and holistic approaches for the transformation of cement production into a socio-ecologically sustainable industrial segment had never been more imperative. This paper rigorously evaluates the parameters and alternatives for the sustainable transformation of Pakistan's cement industry. Economic, environmental, and social parameters are explored and screened using multiple methodologies. Real-world data collected from the operating cement plants in Pakistan are analyzed using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Grey Relational Analysis (GRA). The consolidated list of sustainability criteria and alternatives is evaluated using the Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) framework, which incorporates the involvement of both local and international stakeholders for prioritization of the transformation goals. Data analytic results reveal that carbon emissions have a strong degree of statistical association with production ingredients such as SiO2, Insoluble Residue (IR), Al2O3, and Fe2O3. Although there are a few interesting variations in the priorities computed from the recorded perspectives of different stakeholders, the consensus on giving top priority to environmental parameters and the alternatives like ‘Waste-heat Recovery Plants’ and ‘Vertical Rolling Mills’ is novel and promising. By taking all the main sustainability domains into account, employing multidimensional techniques, and involving multiple stakeholder perspectives under the context of a developing country, the research outcomes of this study become highly attractive for researchers, investors, and policymakers all over the world.

Towards a comprehensive understanding of Integrated Community Care (ICC)

Introduction: Health and functional decline in older people greatly affects their need for care and support. Governments, when confronted with ageing populations, therefore use the policy perspective of ‘ageing in place’, which supports social and health care in the personal environment of people. Recent studies also accentuate the influence of the location in which people live on their health and social care needs. One possible way to implement social and health care in localities is by integrated community care (ICC) or caring neighbourhoods. In Flanders (Belgium), we see a couple of initiatives and policy using the concept of ICC. Although internationally there is progressively more attention towards this concept, there is virtually no agreement between scholars on what exactly it entails. This study aims to develop a framework for a better understanding of ICC by providing insight in its objectives and critical success factors. This framework can be used by initiators of ICC projects and policy makers to develop ICC projects and to formulate policy recommendations. 
 Method: The study consisted of five focus groups with stakeholders of ICC to identify the objectives and critical success factors. Two main groups of stakeholders were defined in Flanders and Brussels: (1) stakeholders with experiences regarding ICC, and (2) academic experts or policy makers of the Flemish or Brussels’ Government. The first group was questioned using the Multi-actor multi-criteria analysis method (Macharis et al., 2012). The second group reflected on the results of the first focus groups, using a semi-structure interview scheme. The results of the descriptive thematic analysis were compared and combined with key elements of ICC, as found in a review of academic and grey literature.
 Results: The five focus groups with the stakeholders led to the identification of objectives and critical success factors. We identified two sets of objectives: (i) process goals; and (ii) operational objectives, or effective objectives. For every objective, accompanying and general critical success factors were formulated. All objectives can be connected to key elements of ICC found in literature, dealing with methods or strategies, goals or ambitions and stakeholders. The presence of involved stakeholders was mostly cited in the critical success factors. The effective objectives correspond with the goals formulated in literature, however, there are some differences. In literature they focus heavily on social and health care, while goals formulated by the stakeholders target mainly social and societal changes.
 Conclusion: Focus groups allowed to define a clear set of stakeholder objectives that determine the success of ICC. The use of the Multi-actor multi-criteria analysis method allowed to build a framework that enable both practitioners and scholars to understand which quantitative and qualitative factors contribute to the success of an ICC project. Future research is needed to understand the relative importance of each factor and objective and how it contributes to the success of ICC. 
 Reference: 
 Macharis, C., Turcksin, L., & Lebeau, K. (2012). Multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to support sustainable decisions: State of use. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 610-620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.08.008 
 
 

Evaluating the Potential of MAMCA as a Framework for Stakeholder Engagement during the Setup of Energy Communities

The current energy transition is characterized by a high level of consumer and prosumer involvement. Energy communities (ECs) are instruments that fit into this trend, as they organize the collective and mainly citizen-driven exchange of clean energy. Most stakeholder engagement research for ECs focuses on one aspect such as awareness raising or deployment acceptance. Hitherto, no specific research has been conducted on a participatory approach that can be applied throughout all the phases of an EC setup and for different purposes. In our study, we determine how the Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria analysis (MAMCA) methodology can be used as an engagement tool for this purpose. By linking potential engagement goals and their connected tools and techniques to the corresponding MAMCA step, we have created a multi-layered practical framework that can be used by all types of EC initiators for stakeholder engagement throughout the setup of a new EC. As this practical tool stimulates solutions that cater better to stakeholder needs, it can contribute to smoother deployment and an associated increase in ECs in the general system. A theoretical evaluation and a performed case study demonstrate the utility of the methodology that is developed in this paper.

Assessing SDI Implementation Scenarios to Facilitate Emergency Mapping Operations in the Dominican Republic

The Dominican Republic (DR) is a small island developing state (SIDS) highly exposed to disaster-risk phenomena, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, etc. The Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) enables coordination and sharing of spatial information and services from multiple sources, while emergency mapping operations (EMO) help decision-makers build a common operational picture (COP) of impacted communities. Assessment of future scenarios for SDI implementation to meet emergency mapping goals requires the consideration of a wide range of stakeholders with different objectives. We make use of multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) in the case study of DR to evaluate government, private sector, emergency mapping team (EMT), and academia perspectives of three governance scenarios (Going-Concern, Increasing-Hierarchy, and Increasing-Network) for SDI implementation. Our findings suggest that the ‘Increasing Network’ scenario is the most suitable for SDI implementation. A well-coordinated inter-organizational network through a SDI should empower more stakeholders to participate in EMO. This work highlighted the increase of public-private partnerships as a key criterion to share costs and efforts to effectively support emergency mapping tasks. Findings reported herein could assist decision-makers in designing roadmaps to enhance SDI implementation in the DR. This knowledge will also support future studies/practices in other SIDS, which share similar natural hazards and development issues.

Perception-Based Analysis of the Perspectives of Users and Non-Users of Different Shared Mobility Services

Perception-based analysis is conducted in this study to specify users’ and non-users’ perceptions about shared mobility systems, including their opinions, attitudes, and actual understanding. Multi-actor multi-criteria analysis and the Bayesian best-worst method are used in this regard. From the weight analysis, the conclusion is drawn that the three most important criteria for users and non-users of shared mobility services are traveler safety, cost, and accessibility, respectively. Further, the scores of the criteria given by users are generally higher than those of non-users, except for the travel cost of scooter-sharing services, which may show that non-users underestimate it. Furthermore, the perception analysis shows that the criteria accessibility and comfort show the largest view gap between the users and non-users. Also, based on the analysis of the eight criteria examined in this study, car-sharing services are preferred by both users and non-users beyond their actual market share. In addition, cost is the only criterion that has the least contribution to the car-sharing choice by both users and non-users, which in their view, is a result of its higher service cost. Additionally, the accessibility of bike-sharing and scooter-sharing contributes more to the value of these two services for their users, while the opposite is true for non-users. Finally, non-users value the speed of scooter-sharing less than users. This study offers insights into users’ and non-users’ perceptions, especially for some qualitative choice criteria seldomly considered in econometric models.

Evaluation of alternative mobility scenarios in the post-COVID-19 period with the use of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA)

The emergence, spread, and outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, first in the Wuhan city of China but later in the rest of the world, has affected the lives of people all over the world. This inevitable influence has not left the transportation sector unaffected. Therefore, there is a need to examine whether the choices of citizens have been influenced in terms of their mobility. The choice of the optimal solution for each citizen depends on many factors, such as the price of transportation fuel, the safety of going to work, the availability of public transport, the possibility of risk of infection, etc. The mobility choices of the citizens in the pre-COVID-19 era in comparison with the post-COVID-19 era have changed due to the increased vigilance of the citizens. In addition to citizens, other stakeholders are infectious disease experts/epidemiologists, transportation engineers, etc. This is, therefore, a problem that is offered for analysis using Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA). This research investigates the mobility choices of people in the post-COVID-19 era using the different stakeholder groups and the MAMCA methodology. Useful results arise concerning the influencing factors of the mobility choices of different stakeholder groups in the post-COVID-19 era.

A Multidimensional Evaluation of Technology-Enabled Assessment Methods during Online Education in Developing Countries

Humanity has faced unprecedented chaos in the education sector due to the inevitable sudden adoption of online mode of learning during the pandemic. The complexities associated with technology-enabled learning and assessment have different connotations in developing countries due to a lack of infrastructure and awareness. Such countries can switch over to an online mode of education more frequently in the future due to highly volatile local political and cultural situations on top of the pandemic. This study evaluates the complexities associated with technology-enabled online assessment methods in Pakistan. Technology readiness and performance for the learning assessment of students are appraised through approaching approximately one thousand students from more than one hundred public and private sector engineering universities. A screened list of assessment alternatives and their influencing factors are then prioritized using the multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) by considering the perceptions of national policymakers, faculty members and students. The aggregate results reveal that, among the influencing factors, ‘mental health’ received the highest weightage, and stakeholders are indifferent to associated costs despite financial challenges. Automated MCQs secured the top position in the ranking list. Sensitivity analysis incorporates some disagreements among the stakeholders, which makes this study highly beneficial for policy modeling.

A methodology to determine suitable locations for regional shared mobility hubs

As a solution to the high greenhouse gas emissions and declining quality of life caused by private vehicles, the shared mobility hub is introduced. The shared mobility hub is a place where multiple modalities come together, including public transport and shared private mobility. As the shared mobility hub is a relatively new solution, limited research is available on the topic, especially on finding potentially suitable locations for allocating them. In this research, this knowledge gap is addressed by developing and testing a generic methodology to determine suitable locations for a specific type: the regional shared mobility hub. The regional shared mobility hub is located outside a city center being able to act as an intermodal point of transfer. The developed methodology is a combination of two existing methods: the GIS Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) and Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) available in the literature. The method is able to score and weight different criteria which determine regional shared mobility hub suitability, taking the end-user (traveler), operator, and government perspectives into account in the weighting. Results are presented in multiple heat maps based on scenarios with varying stakeholder weight importance. The methodology developed consists of five criteria that measure location suitability (potential demand at a certain location, hub implementation costs, generalized travel costs from and to the hub, link to surroundings, and societal impact) measured by nine attributes. In this method, the choice is made for the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine the criteria weights. The developed methodology is applied to the region of Rotterdam (The Netherlands) to analyse if the methodology produces useful results for policy implementation. From multiple analyses, it appears that the methodology is suitable for tackling the location suitability determination problem, as it produces intuitive results.

Stakeholder viewpoints analysis of the autonomous vehicle industry by using multi-actors multi-criteria analysis

The availability of autonomous vehicles (AVs) on the market will create a novel situation for every stakeholder. A lot of research has been conducted on developing the AVs and the consequences of having AVs on the market, but comprehensive studies concerning various viewpoints on the introduction of AVs into the market can be scarcely found. This research is examining different actors' viewpoints on the acceptance of privately shared autonomous vehicles (PSAVs). Four groups of stakeholders are identified as the following: users, legislators, operators, and manufacturers. The multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) is used, where the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the parsimonious AHP (PAHP)methods are applied to evaluate each actor's objectives and criteria. From each group, a representative sample is collected, the actors evaluate a set of pairwise comparison matrices (PCMs), and their consistency is continuously checked. As a result, the objectives and the criteria are ranked and presented. The main finding of the objectives' analysis presents that the safety concerns receive the highest ranking (i.e., weight is 0.085), while the ease of use and the interoperability across the borders have the lowest rankings ((i.e., weight is 0.048, and 0.0515, respectively). The main finding of criteria's analysis shows that ease of use has the lowest ranking (i.e., weight is 0.0024), and the highest rank is related to the reduction in vehicle accidents caused by the malfunction (i.e., weight is 0.0495). Thus, it seems that safety related issues are the most important factor in accepting PSAV. The result of this study is useful for decision-makers and transport planners to form policies, regulations, and guidelines regarding the future implementations of PSAVs before their arrival to the market.

Evaluation of development partnership scenarios of the Croatian seaports using MAMCA analysis

The aim of this paper is to evaluate development partnership scenarios of the seaports in the Republic of Croatia using the Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA). Previous author’s research indicated a number of effects and criteria that PPPs need to achieve in order to ensure sustainable port development. However, implementation of partnership models in seaports in the Republic of Croatia has not reached its full potential although there has been significant progress over the last ten years. For that reason, the evaluation of the partnership models in Croatian seaports is a poorly researched issue. The author has defined three models of port development according to the degree of private investors’ involvement in Croatian ports (status quo, minimal participation and maximal participation of private sector). The author uses MAMCA as a tool to evaluate the PPP model, using relevant criteria for the evaluation of public-private partnerships (economical-financial, organizational, technical-technological, social criteria and the criteria aiming at harmonization with the policies of the European Union), from relevant stakeholders’ point of view (public interest, private interest and the interest of the wider community). The research results show that the best-evaluated model is maximal participation of private sector. It has positive influence on port development from economic and technological side, it directly contributes to different stakeholder’s interests, and in the long term, it contributes to the local community development.

Designing successful energy communities: A comparison of seven pilots in Europe applying the Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis

Energy Communities (ECs) are emerging players in the energy market in the European Union. While policymakers promote their development by introducing legal entities for ECs, stakeholders experience various challenges during their set-up. A factor regarded key for the success of ECs is the consideration of stakeholder objectives. In this study we analysed seven case studies in Belgium, Spain, the Netherlands, and Greece, in which the multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) was applied in the design phase of ECs. We highlight commonalities and differences for each site, providing insight into the variations in EC options, stakeholders, as well as their preferences regarding the analysed ECs. We found that the aspects considered most important were emission reduction, community building, energy cost reduction and grid stability. EC options with greater end-consumer participation and shared benefits were preferred in all cases by all stakeholders.

Developing a Decision-Making Framework to Improve Healthcare Service Quality during a Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted almost every sector. This impact has been especially felt in the healthcare sector, as the pandemic has affected its stability, which has highlighted the need for improvements in service. As such, we propose a collaborative decision-making framework that is capable of accounting for the goals of multiple stakeholders, which consequently enables an optimal, consensus decision to be identified. The proposed framework utilizes the best–worst method (BWM) and the Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) methodology to capture and rank each stakeholder’s preferences, followed by the application of a Multi-Objective Linear Programming (MOLP) model to identify the consensus solution. To demonstrate the applicability of the framework, two hypothetical scenarios involving improving patient care in an intensive care unit (ICU) are considered. Scenario 1 reflects all selected criteria under each stakeholder, whereas in Scenario 2, every stakeholder identifies their preferred set of criteria based on their experience and work background. The results for both scenarios indicate that hiring part-time physicians and medical staff can be the effective solution for improving service quality in the ICU. The developed integrated framework will help the decision makers to identify optimal courses of action in real-time and to select sustainable and effective strategies for improving service quality in the healthcare sector.

Hierarchizing the importance of the attributes of an online shared freight transportation service platform with the use of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA)

The purpose of this paper is to hierarchize the importance of the attributes of an online shared freight transportation service platform with the use of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA). A MAMCA was performed amongst the partners of the INTERREG Balkan-Med SCOPE project in order to hierarchize the attributes of such a platform which is under development in the frame of the project. The results show that all the actors agree that the most important criterion is the Service, i.e., the services that the platform will provide. The research institute and the chambers actors agree that the second most important criterion is Access, i.e., the interface of the platform, while the university actor thinks that Range is the second most important criterion, i.e., the service area of the platform. Probably, the actors who are closer to the market understand better the needs, requirements, and preferences of the users than academia, and that once you set up the platform for a specific Range, it can be easily expanded to cover more areas in the future. Nevertheless, it has to be underlined that these results have been derived by a very small sample, i.e., the partners of the SCOPE project and probably a broader MAMCA, including more stakeholders, should be performed in order to validate them.

Siting of Safe and Secure Truck Parking Areas in Greece and definition of their security level with the use of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA)

The purpose of this paper is the siting of safe and secure truck parking areas in Greece and the definition of their security level. The increase of road freight transport, and the need for the strengthening of its safety, led to the need for developing a plan for the deployment of safe and secure Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) parking areas. A demand and supply survey led to the development of a plan to address 29.83% of the total demand. Nine (9) stakeholder groups, represented by twelve (12) participants, participated in a Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) of the criteria evaluation for choosing the most suitable security level out of the following levels: Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum, for Aigio’s Rest Area. The Platinum level was commonly chosen as the most appropriate.

Value-Added Services at Dry Ports: Balancing the Perspectives of Different Stakeholders

Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate which dry port services generate the greatest positive impact on stakeholders and their objectives. Stakeholders identified from the literature are the dry ports, the dry port’s municipality/region, the seaport, shippers, shipping lines, rail operators, and road operators. A method based on multi-actor multi-criteria analysis is applied to allow the evaluation of different scenarios considering the objectives and opinions of multiple stakeholders. The findings show that the basic services of the dry ports studied are crucial to establishing initial operations. Expanding the service portfolio by adding a wider range of customer-oriented value-added services generates extra economic and environmental benefits for stakeholders. The results expand the understanding on stakeholder benefits from the diversified range of dry port services, while the inclusion of multiple stakeholders in the analysis acknowledges the heterogeneity in stakeholder perceptions. Finally, this methodology enables the creation of an extensive set of criteria and indicators for dry port evaluations.

Development of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis Based on the Weight of Stakeholder Involvement in the Assessment of Natural–Cultural Tourism Area Transportation Policies

Multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA) was developed with a process involving the participation of various stakeholders. Stakeholders express various criteria as measures for the achievement of their respective goals. In general, the assessment of each stakeholder is considered to have the same weight. In reality, the weight of each stakeholder’s involvement in policy decision making is not the same. For example, the government’s assessment weight will be different from those of local business actors. In this study, the authors developed a multi-actor multi-criteria analysis method by adding the weight of stakeholder involvement when making decisions about transportation policies that support sustainable mobility in protected natural–cultural tourism areas. The weight of involvement was developed through stakeholder participation. Stakeholders were asked to provide weights for all stakeholders other than themselves using the AHP method. The results of this weighting were then averaged and considered as the stakeholder assessment weights. Adding stakeholder weighting can also improve the quality of decisions by avoiding bias and following the principle of fairness in the assessment.

Creating stakeholder awareness in construction logistics by means of the MAMCA

The temporariness of construction supply chains, in combination with the multiplicity of stakeholders complicates the organization of construction logistics. The problem for cities today is not the construction materials’ transports as such, it is how to ensure accessibility and mobility for stakeholders during the construction time. In general, there is no tradition of including different stakeholder perspectives when evaluating construction logistics setups. However, in other urban freight transport applications, multi-stakeholder dialogues are more common, and one methodology suggested and used as a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) method is the Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA). In this paper we develop a customized methodology for applying MAMCA in a construction logistics context, gradually refining the methodology along five cases in three different countries. We show how MAMCA must be adapted to fit the construction context. The main differences are: (1) predefined construction logistics alternatives, (2) predefined actors and criteria groups, and (3) the possibility of using the method in role play to create awareness of stakeholder views in homogenous groups. The methodology proved to be valuable for (1) identifying relevant stakeholders and their criteria, (2) identifying and understanding stakeholders’ preferences regarding construction logistics, and (3) creating awareness of the need to initiate construction logistics in a project. Furthermore, it showed the need to clarify whom is to take responsibility for initiating the use of construction logistics setups.