Comparisons of robustness measures as a communicative means for involvement of decision makers

Decisions about infrastructure projects or new policies in the transport sector have traditionally been based on cost benefit analysis (CBA). However, as society in general becomes more and more complex, this affects the decisionmaking process. Thus decision-makers are confronted with the difficult problem of evaluating potential outcomes and choosing policies to achieve the desired outcomes in the presence of this complexity. In this respect, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) becomes a useful tool for the decision-makers as this type of analysis is able to perform an assessment based on a more comprehensive evaluation framework by also taking into account non-quantifiable impacts. This article concerns decision-making relating to transport projects involving multiple objectives (MCDA); especially it addresses how to measure the robustness of these decisions as regards involving views of multiple and diversified stakeholders within the MCDA. The communicative means for involving stakeholders and decision-makers in the decision process are also discussed. Specifically, based on theory and case studies, a comparison of different measures for decision robustness are treated including also how these measures can be communicated to the decision-makers. Furthermore, it is examined how the choice of MCDA methodology can affect the robustness. Finally, in addition to summarising the findings, some recommendations for applying robustness measures are given.