Premium
A descriptive model of choice for siting facilities
Author(s) -
Kunreuther Howard,
Lathrop John,
Linnerooth Joanne
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
behavioral science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.371
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1099-1743
pISSN - 0005-7940
DOI - 10.1002/bs.3830270307
Subject(s) - credibility , context (archaeology) , process (computing) , computer science , action (physics) , risk analysis (engineering) , management science , decision analysis , operations research , set (abstract data type) , decision support system , extension (predicate logic) , politics , business , economics , political science , artificial intelligence , engineering , paleontology , law , biology , physics , mathematical economics , quantum mechanics , programming language , operating system
The siting of facilities for large‐scale, novel technologies presents a formidable challenge to political risk management. This paper develops a model for describing the decision process for this type of problem at the level of societal systems. It explicitly considers the role of the relevant interested parties, each of whom brings to the siting debate its own set of objectives and attributes. We have labeled the approach a multiattribute multiparty model (MAMP to distinguish it from prescriptive techniques such as multiattribute utility analysis or decision analysis). The MAMP model is a natural extension of the burgeoning literature on the key role that limited time, attention, and information processing capabilities play in political decision making when there are uncertain outcomes and likely conflicts among interested parties. The model also highlights the importance of decentralized and sequential decision making and indicates the role that formal risk assessments have played at each stage of the process. We illustrate its application in the context of the decision process associated with a proposed liquiefied natural gas terminal in California. The concluding portion of this paper suggests future research needs for improving the credibility of analysis and facilitating collective action with respect to facility siting problems.