1. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen1 Dr. Joonas Hokkanen Consulting Engineers Paavo Ristola Ltd Finland Presentation of the EU study (1997) “THE USE OF DECISION-AID METHODS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF RISK REDUCTION MEASURES IN THE CONTROL OF CHEMICALS”

2. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen2 DEVELOPMENT OF A RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY. AN EXAMPLE OF THE PROCEDURE UNDER THE EU ‘EXISTING SUBSTANCES REGULATION’.

3. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen3 The assessment of the risk reduction measures leads to the typical multicriteria problem

4. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen4 THE FIVE TYPICAL PROBLEMS IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS

5. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen5 Traditional MCDA-approach

6. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen6 CRITICAL INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE APPLICATION OF DIFFERENT PROCEDURES AND METHODS FOR A TRANSPARENT AND CONSISTENT DECISION ClassSubclassCritical information Disaggregative procedures Procedures with no pre­ference or criteria level information Normalisation technique Ordinal ranking Procedures with some criteria level information Standard levels Comparison order Criteria and alternative removal Monetary valuation Trade-offs Procedures based on ordinal preference inform­ation Ranking order Criteria and alternative removal Aggregative methodsMethods based on utility theoryValue functions Utility values Weights Pairwise comparison matrices Monetary transformation methodsTransformation procedure Scoring techniquesNormalisation technique Weights Outranking methodsWeights Preference thresholds Indifference thresholds Veto thresholds Ranking coefficients Continuous mathematical programming Reference points Constraints used

7. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen7 CONNECTION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND ALTERNATIVE SUBSTITUTION ASSESSMENT Fundamental steps of the Planning Process Alternative AssessmentDecision Aid tools Definition of objectives Expert judgment, Group Participation, Interviews etc Generation of alternativesDefining the alternative plansExpert judgment, Group Participation, Interviews etc Formulation of criteria / measures of effectiveness Defining the impact of the alternative plans Expert judgement, Group Participation, Interviews etc Evaluation of alternatives Expert judgment, Group Participation, Interviews etc Comparison of the alternatives /Conflict solving Comparing the alternative plansMCDA Disaggregative procedures, partially and totally aggregative methods etc Planning how to reduce the potential nuisances and how to monitor the effects. Selection of preferred alternativeMCDA Disaggregative procedures, partially and totally aggregative methods etc

8. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen8 SMAA - approach

9. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen9 SMAA Weight Space Analysis Identifies the favorable weights W i that make alternative i the preferred one Acceptability index a i = the expected volume of W i Central weight w i c = centroid of W i

10. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen10 Rank r acceptability indices Rank acceptability indices are similarly computed for each rank r= 1,…,m The resulting acceptability profile can be plotted and used for identifying compromise alternatives

11. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen11

12. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen12

13. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen13 THE LOGICAL FLOW FOR APPLYING DIFFERENT PROCEDURES AND METHODS

14. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen14 1.It is open and explicit 2.The choice of objectives and criteria that any decision making group may make are open to analysis and to change if they felt to be appropriate 3.Scores and weights, when used, are also explicit and are developed according to established techniques 4.Performance measurement can be sub-contracted to experts, so need not necessarily be left in the hands of the decision making body itself, 5.It can provide an important means of communication, within the decision making body and sometimes, later between that body and wider community, and 6.Scores and weights are used, it provides an audit trail. MCDA (Multi Criteria Decision Aid) has many advantages:

15. Nov 2004Joonas Hokkanen15 www.ristola.com