MPC 2.0©, software for the implementation of the AHP methodology

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español)
Published: 30-04-2012

Main Article Content

Fernando Pérez Rodríguez
Unidade de Xestión Forestal Sostible (UXFS). Departamento de Enxeñaría Agroforestal. Escola Politécnica Superior de Lugo. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Campus Universitario s/n 27002 Lugo
Spain
A. Rojo Alboreca
Unidade de Xestión Forestal Sostible (UXFS). Departamento de Enxeñaría Agroforestal. Escola Politécnica Superior de Lugo. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Campus Universitario s/n 27002 Lugo
Spain
No 7 (2011), Original articles
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15304/rr.id90
Submitted: 30-04-2012 Accepted: 30-04-2012 Published: 30-04-2012
Copyright How to Cite

Abstract

This paper presents the MPC© 2.0 softwaredesigned to facilitate the implementation of the methodologyknown AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), based inmulticriteria decision making under pairwise comparison.The software is especially useful in decisions where it isnecessary to consider many different types of criteria (bothreadily quantifiable or not) and / or many possiblealternatives, as well as when it is necessary to considerdifferent instances of the decision by the same or differentusers. MPC© 2.0 provides pairwise comparisons of criteria(first phase of the methodology) and the alternatives undereach criterion (second phase), minimizing the implicit bias tothem. It also allows the scheme of a two-levels criteria(criteria and subcriteria, with the possibility of 40 items each)and conducting independent pairwise comparison of criteriaand alternatives under each criterion. From thesecomparisons MPC© 2.0 automates all matrix calculations toassign the weight (or priority) of each alternative, andcalculates the degree of inconsistency of the decision (whichindicates whether the set rating is logic). MPC© 2.0integrates a graphical interface to facilitate the presentationof the results, as well as a sensitivity analysis, whichprovides the user with the variation of the results bymodifying the weights of the criteria.

Keywords:

Pairs comparion, Criteria, Alternatives
Cited by

Article Details

References

Buongiorno, J., Keith, J. (2003). Decision methods for forest resource management. Academic Press. 439 pp

Kangas, A., Kangas, J., Kurttila, M. (2001). Decision Support for forest management. Ed. Springer. 221 pp.

Kangas, J.; Kangas, A. (2005) Multiple criteria decision support in forest management—the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. Forest Ecology and Management 207. pp 133-143

Gadow, K.V., Bredenkamp, B. (1992). Forest management. Academica. Pretoria. 151 pp.

Leskinen, P., Kangas, J. (1998). Analysing uncertainties of interval judgment data in multiple-criteria evaluation of forest plans. Silva Fennica 32, 4: pp 363-372.

Pena de Ladaga, S., Berger, A. (2006). Toma de decisiones en el sector agropecuario. Editorial Facultad Agronomía. Buenos Aires. 308 pp.

Pérez, F., Rojo, A. (2010). Apply the AHP by new free software called MPC for take decisions in forest management. IUFRO World Congress, Seoul 2010.

Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill. New York. 287 pp.

Saaty, T.L. (1990). Decision making for Leaders. The Analitic Herarchy Process for decision in a complex World. University of Pittsburgh. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, USA. 292 pp.

Saltello, A., Ratto, M., Tarantola, S., Campolongo, F. (2006). Sensitivity analysis practices: Strategies for model-based inference. Reliability. Engineering and System Safety 91: pp 1109-1125.

Schmoldt, D.L., Kangas, J., Mendoza, G.A., Pesonen, M. (2001). The Analytic Hierarchy Process in natural resource and environmental decision making. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dortrecht. 328 pp.

Schoner, B., Wedley, W. (2007). Ambiguous Criteria Weights in AHP: Consequences and Solutions. Faculty of Business Administration, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columhia, Canada VSA IS6.

Toskano, G.B., Bruno, G. (2000). El proceso de Análisis Jerárquico (AHP) como Herramienta para la Toma de Decisiones en la Selección de Proveedores. Disponible en:

http://sisbib.unmsm.edu.pe/Bibvirtual/monografias/Basic/tos kano_hg/contenido.htm/Cap2.pdf [12 abril, 2010].

Triantaphyllou, E., Sanchez, A. (1997). A sensitivity analysis approach for some deterministic multi-criteria decision making methods. Decision Sciences. 28, 1: 151-194.

Zanazzi, J.L. (2003). Anomalías y supervivencia en el método de toma de decisiones de Saaty. En: Problemas del Conocimiento en Ingeniería y Geología, Vol. I, Godoy, L.A. (Editor): 148-170 pp.