Multi Criteria Analysis
Multi Criteria Analysis is a technical term for a process that people use every day to make decisions. This process supports decision making by clearly identifying and prioritising the factors that will be considered when making a decision.
Multi Criteria Analysis provides a tool for evaluating design and alignment options for the Roe Highway extension. Using a sustainability assessment approach, the factors for the Roe Highway Extension project will fall under three headings: Social, Environmental and Economic.
- Examples of social factors include the impact on heritage values and visual amenity.
- Examples of environment factors include the impact to wetlands, fauna and air quality.
- Examples of economic factors include the cost of construction and efficient freight and vehicle movement.
The criteria and their attributes are being developed with input from community and stakeholders. South Metro Connect will then translate this information into weighted and measureable criteria for the design team. By applying the criteria to the various design options we can identify those which are most appropriate.
A simplified example of Multi Criteria Analysis is shown below in relation to buying a car.
MCA Workshop - February 2010
On Friday 19 February, South Metro Connect held an MCA workshop at Willetton Sports Centre. The event was attended by 64 stakeholders and members of the community.
During the workshop, participants were asked to contribute to the listing of criteria for each of the three categories: environmental, social and economic. The lists were then collated and all workshop participants were asked to vote using a colour coded dot system. For each category, each participant was given 1 red dot (representing 3 votes), 1 yellow dot (representing 2 votes) and 10 blue or black dots (representing 1 vote each). The participants were asked to vote in three rounds for each of the three categories.
Where to from here?
The team is undertaking a process to consolidate the results of the MCA Workshop into ranked and measurable criteria for the design team.
Step One: Preliminary Data
The first step is to collate the raw data from the Community and Stakeholder Workshop. The preliminary data can be downloaded via the following links:
*Note: the raw data tables contain all the original material and vote counts from the workshop, plus a preliminary ranking. The rankings will change when the consolidation process is completed.
Step Two: Consolidate and Re-rank the Criteria
The second step is to consolidate and re-rank the criteria. As part of this step the team will remove any overlap and duplication, and provide measurability for the designers and environmental scientists. We are endeavouring to make this process as transparent as possible.
Step two of the consolidation process is as follows:
-
Code the criteria as Soc1, Soc2, Soc3, etc., to allow traceability.
-
Where necessary and appropriate, combine criteria within a category (eg. combine Soc1 and Soc2) and add the votes. During the process of populating the framework the same criteria often appeared more than once. These criteria will be joined together as one. For example, 'access' and 'connectivity' ultimately refer to the same thing and these criteria will be combined.
-
Where necessary and appropriate, combine criteria across categories (eg. combine Soc1 and Env2) and add the votes. For the MCA process to work, a criteria must only appear once and must not be repeated across different categories. For example, while 'noise' is both a social and environmental criteria, its primary location is social.
-
Where necessary, relocate criteria to another category (eg. Soc1 becomes a new Env criteria such as Env37) and relocate the votes to the new category. For the MCA process to work, a criteria must appear in its appropriate category and must not be repeated across different categories. For example, while 'noise' is both a social and environmental criteria, it should only appear in one category.
-
Where necessary and appropriate, split criteria into two or more new criteria (eg Soc1 becomes Soc5 and Soc6) and divide the votes evenly. If the attributes within a criteria are significantly different, they will be split into separate criteria and the votes will be evenly distributed. At this stage, this does not seem to be a necessity.
The results of this step are provided below.
Step Three: Identify Measureable Aspects within the Consolidated Criteria
The third step is to work with the design team to identify the measurable aspects within the consolidated criteria. More information about this step of the process will be posted online shortly.