No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Decisions with Competing Objectives: An Application to Sludge Disposal Alternatives in Massachusetts
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 May 2017
Extract
Economic theory generally involves choice between real-valued criterion vectors x = (xi, …, xn) ε X, where X is the feasible set of such vectors. For example, in the theory of consumer demand, the criterion xi can be interpreted as the quantity demanded of the ith good. Under certainty, a rational consumer would choose a value of x that would maximize the ordinal utility u(x) subject to x ε X. If a function u(x) does not exist, in the paradigm of Marschak [1976], he is not national, his choices are not consistent, and some of them will be regretted. Even greater focus is placed on the multidimensional nature of the criterion function by the alternative approach suggested by Lancaster [1966]. His approach views goods or services as being demanded because they yield want-satisfying characteristics to consumers. In general, a good or service has multiple characteristics, any one of which may be shared by more than one good or service (the traditional consumer model is a special case which views the number of characteristics as equal to the number of goods or services). Further, goods or services in combination may possess characteristics (attributes) different from those pertaining to the items separately.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , April 1977 , pp. 31 - 40
- Copyright
- Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association
Footnotes
*
This research was supported by the University of Massachusetts Experiment Station: Massachusetts Experiment Station Paper No. 2117.
References
1. Cohon, J. L. and Marks, D. H., “A Review and Evaluation of Multiobjective Programming Techniques,” Water Resources Research, 11: 2: 208–220, 1975.Google Scholar
2. Ecol Sciences, Environmental Impact Statement: Proposed Sludge Management Plan, Metropolitan District Commission, Boston, Massachusetts, Volume 1, 1976.Google Scholar
3. Haimes, Y. Y. and Hall, W. A., “Multiobjectives in Water Resource Systems Analysis: The Surrogate Worth Trade-Off Method,” Water Research, 10: 4: 615–624, August 1974.Google Scholar
4. Haimes, Y. Y., Hall, W. A. and Freedman, H. T., Multiobjective Optimization in Water Resources Systems: The Surrogate Worth Trade-Off Method, New York: Elsevier Scientific, 1975.Google Scholar
5. Havens and Emerson, Environmental Assessment Statement for a Plan for Sludge Management, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Metropolitan District Commission, October 1974.Google Scholar
6. Koopmans, T. C., “Analysis of Production as an Efficient Combination of Activities,” in Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, Cowles Comm. Monog. 13, Edited by Koopmans, T. C., John Wiley, New York, pp. 33–97, 1951.Google Scholar
7. Kuhn, H. W. and Tucker, A. W., “Nonlinear Programming,” in Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Edited by Newman, J., University of California Press, Berkeley, 1951.Google Scholar
8. Lancaster, K. J., “A New Approach to Consumer Theory,” The Journal of Political Economy, 74: 3: 1966.Google Scholar
9. Lindsay, Bruce E., “An Economic Investigation of Alternative Sewage Sludge Disposal Systems: A Multiobjective Programming Approach,” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, August 1976.Google Scholar
10. Marschak, Jacob, “Guided Soul-Searching for Multi-Criterion Decisions,” In Zeleny, , ed., Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Volume 123, Springer-Verlag, 1976, (345 pp.)Google Scholar
11. New England Consortium on Environmental Protection, “Review of Draft Environmental Impact Report–Proposed Sludge Management Plan,” NECEP Report N-76-3, Boston, April 26, 1976, 20 pp.Google Scholar