Integrating local multi-criteria evaluation with spatially explicit uncertainty-sensitivity analysis

References

• Alexander, E. R. (1989). Sensitivity analysis in complex decision models. Journal of the American Planning Association, 55(3), 323–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, J., & Olson, D. L. (1999). Comparison of centroid and simulation approaches for selection sensitivity analysis. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8(3), 146–161.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J., Jia, J., & Dyer, J. (1997). Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models. European Journal of Operational Research, 103(3), 531–546.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, B., & Rinner, C. (2014). Locally weighted linear combination in a vector geographic information system. Journal of Geographical Systems, 16, 343–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., Yu, J., & Khan, S. (2013). The spatial framework for weight sensitivity analysis in AHP-based multi-criteria decision making. Environmental Modelling & Software, 129–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu-Agor, M. L., Munõz-Carpena, R., Kiker, G., Emanuelsson, A., & Linkov, I. (2011). Exploring vulnerability of coastal habitats to sea level rise through global sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Environmental Modelling & Software, 593–604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feick, R. D., & Hall, G. B. (2004). A method for examining the spatial dimension of multi-criteria weight sensitivity. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 18(8), 815–840.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feizizadeh, B., Jankowski, P., & Blaschke, T. (2014). A GIS based spatially-explicit sensitivity and uncertainty analysis approach for multi-criteria decision analysis. Computers & Geosciences, 64, 81–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, G. W. (1995). Range sensitivity of attribute weights in multiattribute value models. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(3), 252–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fotheringham, A. S., & Wong, D. W. (1991). The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A, 23(7), 1025–1044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gómez-Delgado, M., & Bosque-Sendra, J. (2004). Sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria spatial decision-making:a review. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 10(6), 1173–1187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gómez-Delgado, M., & Tarantola, S. (2006). GLOBAL sensitivity analysis, GIS and multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable planning of a hazardous waste disposal site in Spain. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 20(4), 449–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, J., Trinidad, G., and Smith, N. 2000. MOZART: A Multi-Objective Zoning and AggRegration Tool. In Proceedings of the 1st Philippine Computing Science Congress (PCSC), De La Salle University, City of Manila, NCR. 29 November – 1 December 2000. pp. 197–201.
   Google Scholar
• Homma, T., & Saltelli, A. (1996). Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 52(1), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, C.-L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Jankowski, P. (1995). Integrating geographical information systems and multiple criteria decision-making methods. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 9(3), 251–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jankowski, P., Andrienko, N., & Andrienko, G. (2001). Map-centred exploratory approach to multiple criteria spatial decision making. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15(2), 101–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jankowski, P., Nyerges, T. L., Smith, A., Moore, T. J., & Horvath, E. (1997). Spatial group choice: a SDSS tool for colloborative spatial decison-making. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 11(6), 577–602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joerin, F., Thériault, M., & Musy, A. (2001). Using GIS and outranking multi-criteria analysis for land-use suitability assessment. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 15(2), 153–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ligmann-Zielinska, A., & Jankowski, P. (2008). A framework for sensitivity analysis in spatial multiple criteria evaluation. In Geographic Information Science (pp. 217–233). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ligmann-Zielinska, A., & Jankowski, P. (2012). Impact of proximity-adjusted preferences on rank-order stability in geographical multi-criteria decision analysis. Journal of Geographical Systems, 14(2), 167–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ligman-Zielinska, A., & Jankowski, P. (2014). Spatially-explicit integrated uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of criteria weights in multi-criteria land suitability evaluation. Environmental Modelling & Software, 57, 235–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ligmann-Zielinska, A., Jankowski, P., Watkins, J. (2012). Spatial uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for multiple criteria land suitability evaluation. In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Geographic Information Science, September 18–21, Columbus, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Lilburne, L., & Tarantola, S. (2009). Sensitivity analysis of spatial models. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 23(2), 151–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J. (2002). On the use of weighted linear combination method in GIS: common and best practice approaches. Transactions in GIS, 4(1), 5–22.
   Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J. (2004). GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview. Progress in Planning, 62(1), 3–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J. (2006). GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(7), 703–726.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J. (2011). Local weighted linear combination. Transactions in GIS, 15(4), 439–455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J., & Rinner, C. (2005). Exploring multi-criteria decision strategies in GIS with linguistic quantifiers: a case study of residential quality evaluation. Journal of Geographic Systems, 7(2), 249–268.
   Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J., & Rinner, C. (2015). Multi-criteria decision analysis in geographic information science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Monat, J. P. (2009). The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(6), 492–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montello, D. R., & Golledge, R. G. (1998). Scale and detail in the cognition of geographic information. Report of the Specialist Meeting of Project Varenius held May 14–16, 1998 in University of California-Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA. Retrieved from http://www.ncgia.org.
   Google Scholar
• Openshaw S. (1978). An optimal zoning approach to the study of spatially aggregated data. In I. Masser and P. J. B. Brown (Eds.), Spatial Representation and Spatial Interaction (pp. 93–113). Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden.
   Google Scholar
• Openshaw, S., & Rao, L. (1995). Algorithms for reengineering 1991 Census geography. Environment and Planning A, 27(3), 425–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin, X. (2013). Local ideal point method for GIS-based multi-criteria analysis: a case study in London, Ontario. MSc. Thesis supervised by Jacek Malczewski. The University of Western Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, B. (1996). Multi-criteria methodology for decision aiding. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarcy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., & Tarantola, S. (2005). Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 168(2), 307–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, A., Annoni, P., Azzini, I., Campolongo, F., Ratto, M., & Tarantola, S. (2010). Variance based sensitivity analysis of model output. Design and estimator for the total sensitivity index. Computer Physics Communications, 181, 259–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, A., Chan, K., & Scott, M. (Eds.). (2000). Sensitivity analysis (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., Tarantola, S. (2008). Global sensitivity analysis: the primer. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., & Chan, K. (1999a). A quantitative model-independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output. Technometrics, 41(1), 39–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., & Chan, K. (1999b). A role for sensitivity analysis in presenting the results from MCDA studies to decision makers. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8, 139–145.
   Google Scholar
• Sobol, I. M. (2001). Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulations, 55, 271–280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, T. R., & Ely, D. W. (1984). Range sensitivity: a necessary condition and a test for the validity of weights. Multiple Criteria Decision Making Conference  (June 4–8, 1978). Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Store, R., & Kangas, J. (2001). Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modelling. Landscape and Urban Planning, 55(2), 79–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarantola, S., Giglioli, N., Jesinghaus, J., & Saltelli, A. (2002). Can global sensitivity analysis steer the implementation of models for environmental assessments and decision-making? Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 16(1), 63–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2011). Fact Sheet — Conservation Reserve Program Sign- Up 41 Environmental Benefit Index (EBI). United States Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Von Nitzsch, R., & Weber, M. (1993). The effect of attribute ranges on weights in multiattribute utility measurements. Management Science, 39(3), 937–943.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J-X. & Goodchild, M. F. (2002). Uncertainty in geographical information. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., & You, S. (2012). CudaGIS: report on the design and realization of a massive data parallel GIS on GPUs. In Proceedings of the Third ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on GeoStreaming (pp. 101–108). ACM.
   Google Scholar