Applying Multicriteria Analysis in On-Going Evaluation of EU Structural Programmes

Öz

This contribute proposes an application of multicriteria analysis in supporting policy decisions. ELECTRE TRI method is applied for evaluating an Operational Programme co-financed by EU in the structural policy framework 2000-2006. This work has two objectives: i) to ensure that the use of multicriteria approach, through the ELECTRE TRI method, could represent a useful methodological tool to evaluate, in a systematic way, complex programmes, such as EU Structural Funds Program; ii) to demonstrate that the application of this method to a regional programme, could help to achieve satisfactory results in terms of improving the decision making process. To this end, the analysis will test if and to what extent a classificatory not hierarchical multicriteria method, could be
useful in supporting policy makers during the implementation of EU programme. The contribute synthetically describes the general characteristic of the method and then focuses on the criteria utilised to evaluate the programme, within the context of an in itinere evaluation. The application of ELECTRE TRI method will allow the evaluator to cluster the program’s actions in two scenarios and three different risk level classes in each scenario.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Criteria for decision making,Planning policy,Regional policy

Kaynakça

1. Berk, R., and P. Rossi (1999): Thinking about Program Evaluation. SAGE Publications.
2. Boccia, F., and et al (2003): I Mezzogiorni di Europa - Verso la riforma dei fondi strutturali. Il Mulino, Bologna.
3. Brancati, R., and P. R. P. (2003): “Un approccio metodologico per la valutazione intermedia: il caso del Programma Operativo della Campania 2000-2006,” cienze Regionali, 3, 29–56.
4. Chen, T. H. (1990): Theory-driven Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park.
5. (2004): “The Roots and Growth of Theory-Driven Evaluation: An Integrated Perspective for Assessing Viability, Effectuality, and Transferability,” in Evaluation roots, ed. by M. C. Alkin. SAGE Publications, London. (2005): Practical Program Evaluation. SAGE Publications, London.
6. Cronbach, L. J. (1982): Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. JosseyBass, San Francisco.
7. Dias, L., and J. Cl´ ımaco (2000): “ELECTRE TRI for Groups with Imprecise Information on Parameter Values,” Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(5), 355–377.
8. European Economic Community (1987): European Single Act. J L 169 of 29.6.1987, Luxembourg.

9. European Union (1992): Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty). OJ C 191 of 29.7.1992: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
10. Figueira, J., and B. Roy (2002): “Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos’ procedure,” European Journal of Operational Research, 139(2), 317–326.
11. Liesbet, H., and G. Marks (2001): Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Rowman and Littlefield, Buolder.
12. Lourenc¸o, R. P., and J. P. Costa (2004): “Using {ELECTRE} {TRI} outranking method to sort {MOMILP} nondominated solutions,” European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 271 – 289.
13. Marks, G., L. Hooghe, and K. Blank (1996): “European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v. Multi-level Governance*,” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 341–378.
14. Mayntz, R. (1999): “La teoria della governance: sfide e prospettive,” Rivista italiana di scienza politica, 1(3), 3–21.
15. Ministero del Tesoro (1999): Programma di sviluppo del Mezzogiorno. Donzelli, Roma. (2000): del Bilancio e della programmazione Economica. La nuova programmazione eil Mezzogiorno. Donzelli, Roma.
16. Monti, L. (1996): I fondi strutturali per la coesione europea. SEAM, Roma.
17. Mousseau, V., and R. Slowinski (1998): “Inferring an ELECTRE TRI Model from Assignment Examples,” Journal of Global Optimization, 12(2), 157–174.
18. Owen, J. (2006): Program evaluation - Forms and approaches. SAGE Publications, London.
19. Rogers, M., and M. Bruen (1998): “Choosing realistic values of indifference, preference and veto thresholds for use with environmental criteria within {ELECTRE},” European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3), 542 – 551.
20. Rossi, P. H., E. H. Freeman, and M. W. Lipsey (1999): Evaluation - a systematic
21. approach. SAGE Publications, London.
22. Roy, B., and D. Bouyssou (1993): Aide multicritere a la decision: Methodes et cas. Economica, Paris.
23. Roy, B., and V. Mousseau (1996): “A Theoretical Framework for Analysing the Notion of Relative Importance of Criteria,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 5(2), 145–159.
24. Scharpf, F. W. (1994): “Community and Autonomy Multilevel Policy-Making in the European Union,” Discussion Paper 1, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman
25. Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
26. The European Commission (2004): A new partnership for cohesion convergence competitiveness cooperation - Third report on economic and social cohesion. The European Commission,
27. Luxembourg.
28. Unione Europea (2000): Quadro Comunitario di Sostegno per le Regioni Italiane. Decisione
29. C(2000) 2050 del 01.08.2000, GUCE L186/4 del 17-7-2002, Bruxelles.
30. Weiss, C. H. (1972): Evaluation. Prentice Hall, 1972, New Jersey