Assigns Weights to Utility
Function for Each Criterion
Lecture 5
WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD
!Relatedto Multi- Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT)
!Incorporated into the SMART approach (W.
Edwards, “How to Use Multiattribute Utility
Measurement for Social Decision Making, IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics, SMC - 7, 326- 340, 1977)
1 2
Maximize Utility
m "
max
aj
∑ wi ⋅U i [ fi (a j )]
i =1
" Assumes monotonicity
" Utility independence
" Risk neutrality
" Most common method—but probably
" the weakest
3 4
Multiple Criteria
" Flood Protection
# Open channel vs. closed conduit
# Paved channels vs. grass- covered
" Neighborhood Improvement
# More business and commerce
# Multiple uses
# Increase property values
5 6
" Weights assigned to each criterion
{ }
wi | i = 1, 2,..., m Usually > 0
" Evaluation matrix of criteria I for
" each alternative j fi ( a j )
" Define utility function for each
" criterion—e.g., linear is popular choice
U i  fi (a j )  = α i + βi ⋅ fi (a j )
Illustrative Example in
Floodplain Management
Peaks Branch watershed within Dallas
city limits
" Present channel designed for 5 yr
flood only—improve for 100 yr flood
" Formulation of alternative flood-
prevention measures to address
# Technical details
# Community preferences
# Protection to life and property
Multiple Criteria (cont.)
" Neighborhood Acceptance
# Social and aesthetic preferences
" Relocations (people and structures)
# Encounter disapproval
" Project and Maintenance Costs
" Legal Aspects
# Structural and nonstructural changes
# Possible litigation
1
 Management Alternatives (cont.) Management Alternatives (cont.)
1. No Action 5. Basic Greenway
# No corrective measures # Widening of main branch, additional-
2. Purchase of the Floodplain right- of- way
# every structure inundated by 100 yr 6. Concrete Channel
flood purchased and cleared # Detention storage and pump station
3. Park Greenway—North 7. Bypass Conduit
# 2 lakes, hike and bike trails, widen 8. Purchase and Redevelopment of
channels Floodplain
4. Park Greenway--South • Combines 2 and 3
7 8

Landscape
design for Park
Greenway--
South

2
Example of Weighted Average Method--Evaluation of Alternative Plans for Floodplain Management
[from Multiobjective Decision Analysis with Engineering and Business Applications , by A. Goicoechea, D. Hansen, and L. Duckstein, Wiley, 1982]
Buy the Park Green- Park Green- Basic Concrete Bypass Buy/Redevelop
Factors Used No Action Floodplain way--North way--South Greenway Channel Conduit Floodplain
in Evaluation Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 6 Alternative 7 Alternative 8
1. Flood protection Bad Good Good Good Fair Excellent Fair Very Good
2. Multiple use of floodway Fair Very Good Good Good Fair Poor Fair Excellent
3. Enhancement of property values Bad Good Very Good Excellent Fair Fair Fair Good
4. Aesthetic value Bad Fair Very Good Excellent Good Poor Fair Good
5. Relative neighborhood improvement Bad Fair Very Good Excellent Good Fair Fair Good
6. Number of family relocations 0 800 237 419 164 69 30 604
7. Project cost (millions) $0 $12 $9.3 $10.9 $7.7 $5.6 $12.3 $16.3
8. Maintenance cost (thousands) $12 $0 $41 $41 $41 $16 $0 $41
9. Ease of phased construction Excellent Very Good Fair Fair Fair Poor Bad Good
10. Legal obstacles Poor Poor Very Good Good Good Fair Excellent Bad
Evaluation Matrix for Floodplain Management Example
No Action Buy the Floodplain Park Greenway Park Greenway
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 North Alternative 3 South Alternative 4
Relative
Factors Considered in Rating Combined Rating Combined Rating Combined Rating Combined
Importance
Selecting a Design (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating
(1 to 10)
1. Flood protection 10 1 10 6 60 5 50 6 60
2. Multiple use of floodway 7 3 21 7 49 5 35 6 42
3. Enhancement of property values 3 1 3 5 15 7 21 8 24
4. Aesthetic value 5 1 5 4 20 7 35 8 40
5. Relative neighborhood improvement 6 1 6 2 12 7 42 8 48
6. Number of family relocations 8 8.0 64 1.0 8 5.9 47.2 4.3 34.4
7. Project cost 9 8.0 72 2.8 25.2 4.0 36 3.3 29.7
8. Maintenance cost 4 6.0 24 8.0 32 1.0 4 1.0 4
9. Ease of phased construction 2 8 16 7 14 4 8 4 8
10. Legal obstacles 1 2 2 2 2 7 7 6 6
Total Desirability Rating 223 237.2 285.2 296.1
Ranking 8 6 2 1
Buy/Redevelop
Basic Greenway Concrete Channel Bypass Conduit
Floodplain
Alternative 5 Alternative 6 Alternative 7
Alternative 8
Relative
Factors Considered in Rating Combined Rating Combined Rating Combined Rating Combined
Importance
Selecting a Design (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating (1 to 8) Rating
(1 to 10)
1. Flood protection 10 4 40 8 80 4 40 7 70
2. Multiple use of floodway 7 4 28 2 14 3 21 8 56
3. Enhancement of property values 3 4 12 3 9 3 9 6 18
4. Aesthetic value 5 5 25 2 10 3 15 6 30
5. Relative neighborhood improvement 6 5 30 4 24 4 24 6 36
6. Number of family relocations 8 6.6 52.8 7.4 59.2 7.7 61.6 2.7 21.6
7. Project cost (millions) 9 4.7 42.3 5.6 50.4 2.7 24.3 1.0 9
8. Maintenance cost (thousands) 4 1.0 4 5.3 21.2 8.0 32 1.0 4
9. Ease of phased construction 2 3 6 2 4 1 2 6 12
10. Legal obstacles 1 5 5 4 4 8 8 1 1
Total Desirability Rating 245.1 275.8 236.9 257.6
Ranking 5 3 7 4