COMPARISON OF 2 DECISION-AID MODELS APPLIED TO A NUCLEAR-POWER-PLANT SITING EXAMPLE

The aim of this paper is to examine on a non-theoretical ground to what extent outranking and MAUT decision-aid approaches differ. For this purpose, the authors chose a study using utility theory conducted by R. L. Keeney and K. Nair, dealing with a nuclear plant siting problem. They had to determine what the study would have been if it had been conducted with the use of the ELECTRE III model. Confronting the two models, the authors study: the differences that they induce when facing a real problem and building a set of data, their respective part of arbitrariness, weakness, realism, robustness, the convergence or divergence of their results, and insist upon the differences between 'descriptive' and 'constructive' approaches.