Reflections on ethics and MCA in environmental decisions

Abstract

Abstract The aim of decision analysis is normative. Consequently, at least in public spheres, one has to reflect on its normative foundation. Multi‐criteria analysis (MCA) uses aggregated evaluations on several criteria to recommend a decision. The claim for the adequacy of the recommended solution is usually based on the assumption that the interests of the decision‐maker(s) are adequately assessed by the MC model (see, for example, Munda G. 1996. Cost–benefit analysis in integrated environmental assessment: some methodological issues. Ecological Economics 19: 157–168). I argue that as a prerequisite to a normative foundation, the criteria have to reflect not only the interests but possibly all values stemming from normative arguments of the decision‐maker(s). These arguments might differ substantially from each other. This is especially true for environmental decisions. The integration of values will result in changes of the MCA understanding, criteria building, and aggregation method, and will not be possible without analytical capacities of the decision analyst in ethics. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 33 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.