Multi-objective decision-making

Sustainable development involves being aware of multiple effects of decisions. For organisations and governments, or community-based groups pursuing sustainable development, it can be helpful to adopt a formal process for multi-objective decision making that explicitly recognises these interactions. So, organisations may have objectives related to economy, infrastructure, human health, terrestrial environment, and so on, and they need to be able to assess management alternatives for their impact on achievement of these objectives, and certainly identify areas where potential options may produce effects that are counterproductive to any of these objectives. Unfortunately, this is often the case.

Usually, information on the various effects of an alternative varies considerably, and people tend to analyse very thoroughly those areas where much information is available, and either ignore or treat cursorily those areas where there is less information or it is more difficult or expensive to obtain. The result is that there is usually a built in bias in procedures for choosing between alternatives, with basic economic or engineering data given most prominence because of its availability and familiarity to professionals. Reconciling contrasting levels of data availability is one of the major problems that anyone faces when attempting multi-objective decision-making.

Another, related, problem people face when assessing alternatives is choosing the assessment framework, or the criteria for comparing the alternatives. Typically, the criteria for choosing between transport alternatives, for example, will be vastly different from those for choosing between, say, alternatives for managing urban stormwater. Each area of planning develops its own vocabulary of criteria and methods, that isolates it intellectually, and sometimes emotionally, from planning efforts in other areas. Development of these planning silos in large organisations such as city councils or central government agencies, is a key factor hindering balanced multiple objective decision-making, in which alternatives are assessed using tools that encourage unbiased assessment, with full access to the expertise necessary for an appropriate consideration of effects. KiwiGrow™ provides a Common Language and assessment framework that helps to overcome the biases that plague policy silos. It can be used qualitatively or quantitatively.

What decision support systems do

Decision support systems support the process of making choices between alternatives. They provide an intellectual framework, including the criteria on which the decision is to be based, and assistance with the task of identifying the information required to evaluate how well each of the alternatives meets the specified criteria. They should also provide assistance with the process of identifying the preferred alternatives from a set of candidate solutions. So, decision support systems embody values, by suggesting what is important to consider in making the decision, and what can be left out. They also invite users to explore their own values, firstly in relation to whether there is acceptance that the decision support system adequately captures the nature of the problem, and secondly by helping users to discover the consequences of their values and preferences.

When faced with a set of alternatives, users may, on the basis of a less structured or more intuitive process, be inclined to choose one of the options. However, when the decision support system is used, and a user is called upon to be explicit about values and priorities, it may turn out that a different alternative emerges as the option that best matches the stated values. A user can respond to this in four ways: by realigning the values statements and priorities so that the more intuitively selected option emerges as the winner, or by questioning the validity of the decision support system, or by cautiously accepting the suggestion of the decision support system and exploring it further through other means, or (more rarely, in the case of significant strategic decisions) accepting the recommendation of the decision support system outright, and acting on it. More generally, engagement with decision support systems is intended to leave users better informed about the problem situation, the nature and relative values of the alternatives, and about themselves and their own values and preferences.

Thus, decision support systems may or may not lead directly to decisions being made. For strategic decisions, involving whole communities and the environment, decisions are almost invariably made by groups, either small groups of policymakers or planners, or politicians, or by larger groups in a more participatory process, with voting being one possible process. For these kinds of decisions, it is helpful if decision support systems can be used directly with the group. This means, if using the decision support system is expected to produce an executive decision, the group must understand and accept the decision support system. The decision support system therefore has to be reasonably transparent and easy to understand, or simply help out with the less controversial aspects of the decision-making process - perhaps just the mechanics of adding up support for alternatives from the participants. If the decision support system is not completely transparent, then it will need to have been produced through a process that the decision-makers can trust.

Creative Decisions favours simpler decision support systems that can be easily understood by groups. They may or may not be based on KiwiGrow™, and may or may not involve multimedia and web-based tools.

Formal and informal decision support

Formal decision support systems provide a fixed procedure that leads users to a single option or several preferred alternatives. The system may take the form of something as simple as a map or a flow chart, or it may be a computer-based procedure. Informal decision support systems either provide for more involvement of people in the process of providing the kinds of support that the particular group of decision-makers really need, or through providing less rigidity in the procedure to identify the preferred alternatives. Typically, they will emphasise education and learning, more than the actual decision-making process. So, information necessary for the decision may be presented to the user in the form of a multimedia information system, perhaps with interactive computer models included, that the user can explore and retain a sense of having more control over the overall process of arriving at the decision. For complex problems, informal decision support may be more effective in producing better quality decisions, but it is usually helpful to include formal decision support elements also.

Embedding decision support in wider learning processes

People arrive at decision-making contexts with different levels of understanding of the problem situation. Therefore, it is usually preferable to embed support for decision-making in a learning process. This can be at two levels. The first level is embedding decision support in an information system that aims to raise the general level of understanding. The second level is to deliver the decision support as part of a wider learning process that can include exposure to a variety of experiences that improve understanding and may also alter or sharpen values. Collaborative learning processes, that build towards developing a jointly owned decision support system that is actually used in the decision-making, are a robust means of approaching decisions that involve a group who cannot initially agree on the nature of the problem, let alone the nature of the solution.

Creative Decisions can join with communities to help them build their understanding of themselves and their environment. Collaborative learning may focus on consciously defining, then building, an information system that the community feels it needs to have. This may involve the community gathering some information itself, to extend the information available. These information systems can be delivered via CD or Web. Including more sophisticated interactive elements has been easier for CD-based systems, but is becoming more practicable on the internet, where increasing data transmission speeds are making interactive components more feasible.

Creative Decisions embedded a decision support system within Waitakere City's DVD-based Water and Sanitary Services Assessment to help users identify a preferred development option for the city's Northern Growth Area. With this tool, users could move interactive sliders to rate the importance of different performance areas, and then determine which of four water and sanitary services alternatives best met these requirements. The process could be performed for four different land use scenarios: