According to the IPCC (2007) fourth assessment report, small islands and coastal communities have a set of characteristics that makes them very vulnerable to climate change impacts, mainly sea-level rise and storm surges. Coastal hazards including inundation, salinisation of the water supply, and erosion threaten vital infrastructure that support coastal communities. Although Canada has the longest coastline in the world, little work has been done on impacts of climate change and adaptation to these impacts in the Canadian coastal zones. This research is part of an International Community-University Research Alliance (ICURA) C-Change, project to develop a multicriteria decision evaluation and support for the systems analysis of adaptation options for coastal communities toward adapting to environmental changes. This study estimates the vulnerability of coastal communities with respect to their environmental, economic, social, and cultural dimensions. It also applies a group version of the Analytical Hierarchy Process for identifying decisions that various stakeholders make on suggested adaptation strategies. This study develops a methodological framework that is applicable to various coastal and small island contexts. The application of the proposed framework is further discussed in a case study conducted on the communities of Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island (PEI), and Little Anse on Isle Madame, Nova Scotia. Specifically, the state of the Little Anse breakwater is analyzed and new adaptation options are presented and evaluated. This research has illustrated and applied a process of decision evaluation and support that explicitly engages multiple participants and critieria in complex problems situations involving environmental change in coastal communities.

As the growth of rapid prototyping techniques shortens the development life cycle of software and electronic products, usability inquiry methods can play a more significant role during the development life cycle, diagnosing usability problems and providing metrics for making comparative decisions. A need has been realized for questionnaires tailored to the evaluation of electronic mobile products, wherein usability is dependent on both hardware and software as well as the emotional appeal and aesthetic integrity of the design. This research followed a systematic approach to develop a new questionnaire tailored to measure the usability of electronic mobile products. The Mobile Phone Usability Questionnaire (MPUQ) developed throughout this series of studies evaluates the usability of mobile phones for the purpose of making decisions among competing variations in the end-user market, alternatives of prototypes during the development process, and evolving versions during an iterative design process. In addition, the questionnaire can serve as a tool for identifying diagnostic information to improve specific usability dimensions and related interface elements. Employing the refined MPUQ, decision making models were developed using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and linear regression analysis. Next, a new group of representative mobile users was employed to develop a hierarchical model representing the usability dimensions incorporated in the questionnaire and to assign priorities to each node in the hierarchy. Employing the AHP and regression models, important usability dimensions and questionnaire items for mobile products were identified. Finally, a case study of comparative usability evaluations was performed to validate the MPUQ and models. A computerized support tool was developed to perform redundancy and relevancy analyses for the selection of appropriate questionnaire items. The weighted geometric mean was used to combine multiple numbers of matrices from pairwise comparison based on decision makers' consistency ratio values for AHP. The AHP and regression models provided important usability dimensions so that mobile device usability practitioners can simply focus on the interface elements related to the decisive usability dimensions in order to improve the usability of mobile products. The AHP model could predict the users' decision based on a descriptive model of purchasing the best product slightly but not significantly better than other evaluation methods. Except for memorability, the MPUQ embraced the dimensions included in the other well-known usability definitions and almost all criteria covered by the existing usability questionnaires. In addition, MPUQ incorporated new criteria, such as pleasurability and specific tasks performance. / Ph. D.

O Brasil vem passando por um período de mudanças na regulação do mercado de exploração e produção (E&P) de petróleo e gás com o intuito de promover o seu desenvolvimento econômico, tecnológico e científico. Duas destas mudanças foram responsáveis por drásticas modificações no mercado de E&P brasileiro, sendo a primeira, a quebra do monopólio da Petrobras em 1997 com o início da utilização do regime de concessão e, a segunda, a utilização do regime de partilha de produção a partir de 2013 para as áreas estratégicas, especialmente o pré-sal. A busca por um regime regulatório adequado para o mercado de E&P é uma tarefa bastante complexa, porque cada agente envolvido busca defender seus próprios interesses e critérios, o que acaba por resultar em um problema em grupo. Neste trabalho pioneiro, uma nova metodologia é proposta, combinando uma abordagem de tomada de decisão multicritério (MCDM/A) e a teoria de jogos, com o intuito de compreender e analisar mais profundamente este problema e encontrar soluções de equilíbrio. Esta metodologia inovadora é uma das contribuições deste trabalho e propõe modelar a escolha de um regime regulatório mais adequado como um jogo de negociação, levando em consideração as diferentes preferências e perspectivas de todos os agentes envolvidos no mercado brasileiro de E&P de petróleo e gás. Três aplicações práticas do modelo foram realizadas, sendo que as duas primeiras aplicações foram realizadas com dados teóricos e a terceira a partir de coleta de dados com especialistas do mercado de E&P brasileiro. Como principal resultado, verificou-se que a lógica destas aplicações práticas se assemelham ao jogo clássico da Batalha dos Sexos, onde as melhores soluções acontecem quando os agentes coordenam suas ações, mesmo com interesses opostos. Esta dinâmica de conflito de interesses torna a busca por soluções desafiante, sendo improvável que os objetivos de todos os jogadores sejam adequadamente atendidos por somente uma opção, independentemente da alternativa escolhida. / Brazil is facing a period of changes in its regulatory frameworks aiming to promote the economic, technological and scientific development of its entire oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) market. Two of these changes have drastically modified the Brazilian E&P market, which the first one was the utilization of the concession regime breaking the Petrobras monopoly after 1997 and the second one, the adoption of production sharing contracts (PSCs) after 2013 for all the strategic areas, especially the pre-salt. Finding a suitable regulatory framework for the E&P market is a quite complicated task, because every agent involved seeks to defend its own interests and criteria, resulting in a group problem. In this pioneering work, a new methodology is proposed by combining a multicriteria decision-making (MCDM/A) and a game theory approach, targeting to understand and analyze more deeply this complex problem in order to find equilibrium solutions. This innovative methodology is one of the main contributions of this work and proposes to model the choosing of an appropriate regulatory framework as a negotiation game, taking into account the different preferences and perspectives of all agents involved in the Brazilian E&P market. Three practical applications were performed, where the first two were carried out with theoretical data and the third one by using data collected with Brazilian E&P market experts. The main outcome identified that the logic behind these practical applications is similar to the classical game of Battle of sexes, where the best solutions happen when players coordinate their actions, even with opposing interests. This dynamic of conflict of interests makes the search for adequate solutions a challenging task, being unlikely that the objectives of all the players will be sufficiently accomplished by only one option, regardless of the alternative chosen.

O Brasil vem passando por um período de mudanças na regulação do mercado de exploração e produção (E&P) de petróleo e gás com o intuito de promover o seu desenvolvimento econômico, tecnológico e científico. Duas destas mudanças foram responsáveis por drásticas modificações no mercado de E&P brasileiro, sendo a primeira, a quebra do monopólio da Petrobras em 1997 com o início da utilização do regime de concessão e, a segunda, a utilização do regime de partilha de produção a partir de 2013 para as áreas estratégicas, especialmente o pré-sal. A busca por um regime regulatório adequado para o mercado de E&P é uma tarefa bastante complexa, porque cada agente envolvido busca defender seus próprios interesses e critérios, o que acaba por resultar em um problema em grupo. Neste trabalho pioneiro, uma nova metodologia é proposta, combinando uma abordagem de tomada de decisão multicritério (MCDM/A) e a teoria de jogos, com o intuito de compreender e analisar mais profundamente este problema e encontrar soluções de equilíbrio. Esta metodologia inovadora é uma das contribuições deste trabalho e propõe modelar a escolha de um regime regulatório mais adequado como um jogo de negociação, levando em consideração as diferentes preferências e perspectivas de todos os agentes envolvidos no mercado brasileiro de E&P de petróleo e gás. Três aplicações práticas do modelo foram realizadas, sendo que as duas primeiras aplicações foram realizadas com dados teóricos e a terceira a partir de coleta de dados com especialistas do mercado de E&P brasileiro. Como principal resultado, verificou-se que a lógica destas aplicações práticas se assemelham ao jogo clássico da Batalha dos Sexos, onde as melhores soluções acontecem quando os agentes coordenam suas ações, mesmo com interesses opostos. Esta dinâmica de conflito de interesses torna a busca por soluções desafiante, sendo improvável que os objetivos de todos os jogadores sejam adequadamente atendidos por somente uma opção, independentemente da alternativa escolhida. / Brazil is facing a period of changes in its regulatory frameworks aiming to promote the economic, technological and scientific development of its entire oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) market. Two of these changes have drastically modified the Brazilian E&P market, which the first one was the utilization of the concession regime breaking the Petrobras monopoly after 1997 and the second one, the adoption of production sharing contracts (PSCs) after 2013 for all the strategic areas, especially the pre-salt. Finding a suitable regulatory framework for the E&P market is a quite complicated task, because every agent involved seeks to defend its own interests and criteria, resulting in a group problem. In this pioneering work, a new methodology is proposed by combining a multicriteria decision-making (MCDM/A) and a game theory approach, targeting to understand and analyze more deeply this complex problem in order to find equilibrium solutions. This innovative methodology is one of the main contributions of this work and proposes to model the choosing of an appropriate regulatory framework as a negotiation game, taking into account the different preferences and perspectives of all agents involved in the Brazilian E&P market. Three practical applications were performed, where the first two were carried out with theoretical data and the third one by using data collected with Brazilian E&P market experts. The main outcome identified that the logic behind these practical applications is similar to the classical game of Battle of sexes, where the best solutions happen when players coordinate their actions, even with opposing interests. This dynamic of conflict of interests makes the search for adequate solutions a challenging task, being unlikely that the objectives of all the players will be sufficiently accomplished by only one option, regardless of the alternative chosen.

Wind is a fast growing energy resource and the demand for clean energy is increasing with growing interests from media, governmental institutions and the public (EWEA, 2004). The increased interest towards the wind energy market has led to a more competitive environment where it is crucial for a project developer to select projects most likely to succeed, in terms of profitability, among alternatives on the market. To enable such selection, an evaluation process is often applied. Furthermore, traditional evaluation processes are often performed at completion of a project where an early indication of a project’s potential profitability is often missing (Samset & Christensen, 2015). At the early phase of a wind energy project the multiple factors influencing the project’s outcome are often conflicting and contain high level of uncertainty and the evaluation process becomes complex (Kumar et al., 2017). In addition, these factors are difficult to quantify and to determine their relative weight of importance (Çolak & Kaya, 2017). This thesis aims to problematise the early project phase by contributing with a practical tool for evaluating wind energy projects at this phase. In addition, the thesis aims to contribute with an identification and monetarily quantification of the important factors to assess when doing so. The thesis is conducted as a case study at a company developing wind energy projects in Sweden. Due to the multiple factors that influencing a project’s outcome, MCDM (multi-criteria decisionmaking) analysis is used as the research process to create the tool. Findings from this study show that key factors that are possible to quantify at an early phase are conditions for civil works, grid conditions, wind resource and electricity price area. In general, their relative importance, measured in relative increase of IRR, is wind resource, electricity price area, grid conditions and civil works in the descending order. This study has four contributions, three theoretical and one practical. Firstly, the study confirms MCDM as a suitable analysis to use, when creating an evaluation model for wind energy projects. Secondly, the study confirms most of the important factors mentioned in the literature to assess when evaluating a wind energy project. However, this study contributes with insights that only conditions for civil works, grid conditions, wind resource and electricity price area can be quantified for the purpose of creating an evaluation tool at an early phase. Thirdly, previous studies have focused less on determining the relative weight of importance of the relevant key factors and this study contributes by quantifying and determining which of these key factors that are of relevance in an evaluation. Lastly, this study contributes practically by creating an evaluation tool suggested to be used by the case company to compare different projects on the market and form investment decisions based on financial data. Furthermore, the tool facilitates an equal evaluation process for all projects, thus leading to a more standardised decision-making process where the case company can focus their resources on the projects most likely to succeed. / Vind är en snabbväxande energiresurs där efterfrågan efter grön energi ökar från media, statliga myndigheter och allmänheten. Det ständigt ökande intresset av vindenergi har lett till en allt mer konkurrenskraftig marknad där det är viktigt för en projektutvecklare att välja de projekt som är mest troliga att bli lönsamma bland de tillgängliga projekten på marknaden. Dessa urval sker oftast genom en projektutvärderingsprocess. Dock sker merparten av de traditionella projektutvärderingarna i slutet av ett projekt där en tidig indikation rörande ett projektet lönsamhet oftast saknas (Samset & Christensen, 2015). Anledningen till detta är att vindkraftsprojekt består av flera motsägande faktorer med en hög osäkerhet som påverkar ett projekts resultat, vilket leder till en komplex utvärderingsprocess i ett tidigt skede (Kumar et al., 2017). Dessutom är dessa faktorer svåra att kvantifiera vilket gör det svårt att vidare bestämma deras relation i förhållande till varandra (Çolak & Kaya, 2017). Detta examensarbete ämnar därför till att problematisera den komplexa utvärderingsprocessen i ett tidigt skedde genom att skapa ett praktiskt verktyg för en simplifierad utvärderingsprocess av vindkraftsprojekt. Detta examensarbete är utformat som en fallstudie på ett företag i Sverige som utvecklar vindkraftsprojekt. På grund av antalet faktorer som påverkar projektens lönsamhet används MCDM-analys som forskningsprocess för att skapa verktyget. Resultat från denna studie visar att de nyckelfaktorer som är möjliga att kvantifiera i det tidiga skede är: infrastruktur, nätanslutning, vindresurs och elprisområde. Resultaten visar även att faktorernas påverkan, mätt i relativ ökning av IRR, är i fallande ordning: vindresurs, elprisområde, nätanslutning och infrastruktur och att dessa, i fallande ordning, är relevanta att utvärdera. Denna studie har totalt fyra bidrag, varav tre teoretiska och ett praktiskt bidrag. Det första bidraget är en konfirmation av att MCDM är en lämplig analysmetod vid skapandet av utvärderingsverktyget. Det andra bidraget är en konfirmation av de faktorer som nämns i litteraturen som viktiga vid en utvärderingsprocess i ett tidigt skede. Dock är endast faktorerna infrastruktur, nätanslutning, vindresurs och elprisområde möjliga att kvantifiera i detta skede. Det tredje bidraget är kunskap gällande faktorernas förhållande till varandra och vilka som är relevanta att utvärdera. Det praktiska bidraget är utvärderingsverktyget där företaget rekommenderas att använda det för att jämföra olika projekt på marknaden och fatta välinformerade beslut baserat på finansiell data. Dessutom bidrar verktyget med en likvärdig utvärderingsprocess för alla projekt vilket leder till en mer standardiserad beslutsprocess där företaget kan fokusera sina resurser på de projekt som är mest troliga att bli lönsamma.

In cities all over the globe, bicycle-sharing systems are being implemented as a way of promoting bicycling as the primary mode of transportation. Cities encourage the residents to bicycle as a way of improving local environments and reducing traffic congestion. A step in this direction is providing a bicycle-sharing system, which increases the accessibility and mobility in a city. For the availability of a bicycle-sharing system to be maximized, the locations of the docking stations must be carefully selected and analyzed. Several studies have been conducted where the availability of bicycle-sharing systems have been evaluated, using different approaches. However, no studies have been conducted in Stockholm on the newly established Stockholm eBikes bicycle-sharing system. Thus, this thesis aims to evaluate the location of bicycle-sharing stations and determine the most suitable locations of those in Stockholm. This is done through a GIS-based MCDM method which applies an Analytical Hierarchy Process to weigh the criteria that must be considered. The analysis is done in QGIS, an open-source GIS-software, with data from OpenStreetMap and local data sources. The results indicate that the suitability of the current bicycle-sharing stations in Stockholm is high considering the analyzed criteria. Further, a suggestion is given for locations where the suitability for bicycle-sharing stations is high. This suggestion proposes new locations in Stockholm where a bicycle- sharing station could increase the availability of the bicycle-sharing system as well as the mobility in the city.

分析層級程序法在產品刪除決策之應用 / The recent explosion of product management in consumer packaged goods has highlighted the importance of product assortment decisions. In particular, firms are increasingly faced with the decision of which products to delete from distribution. Upon reflection, there are both strategic and tactical dimensions to this decision. Strategic approaches focus on the development of optimal product assortments as the basis for deletion decisions. Tactical approaches address incremental (i.e., item-by- item) decisions whether to delete any product, and if so, which product. This thesis focuses on tactical approaches and proposes using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as a systematic and analytic tool that helps to quantify the managerial judgments in identifying the candidates for product deletion. Supported by a practical case study, which illustrates how AHP can be beneficial in quantifying both financial and non-financial product performance rankings for managers’ easier understanding and higher transparency of product deletion decision-making.

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) represents one of the core research streams in the field of operations research (OR). Altough numerous sound MCDM methods for various kind of applications exist, the application of such methods in the practical field is found rarely. The reason for this gap between scientific development and practical acceptance can be found in two distinct points: On the one hand, MCDM methods naturally tend to build on rather complex mathematical foundations. Decision makers (DMs) in practice are mostly experts in their area of expertise but do not necessarily have solid education or experience with high-level mathematical methods. Thus, in order to not alienate DMs in practice, academic research has to translate mathematically challenging models into easy-to-use, self-explaining tools that can effectively support real-life decision scenarios. On the other hand, academic research in MCDM often ends in the proposal of a theoretical model, that may be sound and promising, but never leaves the field of academics due to its theoretical nature. Therefore, the underlying dissertation investigates on the usage of MCDM methods for integration in a decision support system (DSS), implemented as a sofware that is easy to distribute and applicable to decision problems in practice. This study tries to mitigate the lack of MCDM acceptance by analysing MCDM methods according to their applicability, pointing out possible improvements and validating proposed advancements. (author's abstract)

Continuous development has been occurring in the area of decision support systems. Modern systems focus on applying decision models that can provide intelligent support to the decision maker. These systems focus on modelling the human reasoning process in situations requiring decision. This task may be achieved by using an appropriate decision model. Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) is a common decision making approach. This research investigates and seeks a way to resolve various issues associated with the application of this model. MCDM is a formal and systematic decision making approach that evaluates a given set of alternatives against a given set of criteria. The global evaluation of alternatives is determined through the process of aggregation. It is well established that the aggregation process should consider the importance of criteria while determining the overall worth of an alternative. The importance of individual criteria and of sub-sets of the criteria affects the global evaluation. The aggregation also needs to consider the importance of the sub-set of criteria. Most decision problems involve dependent criteria and the interaction between the criteria needs to be modelled. Traditional aggregation approaches, such as weighted average, do not model the interaction between the criteria. Non-additive measures such as fuzzy measures model the interaction between the criteria. However, determination of non-additive measures in a practical application is problematic. Various approaches have been proposed to resolve the difficulty in acquisition of fuzzy measures. These approaches mainly propose use of past precedents. This research extends this notion and proposes an approach based on similarity-based reasoning. Solutions to the past problems can be used to solve the new decision problems. This is the central idea behind the proposed methodology. The methodology itself applies the theory of reasoning by analogy for solving MCDM problems. This methodology uses a repository of cases of past decision problems. This case base is used to determine the fuzzy measures for the new decision problem. This work also analyses various similarity measures. The illustration of the proposed methodology in a case-based decision support system shows that interactive models are suitable tools for determining fuzzy measures in a given decision problem. This research makes an important contribution by proposing a similarity-based approach for acquisition of fuzzy measures.

Abstract The decrement of Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emission can slow down the impaction to the natural environment as well as avoiding the global warming become worse continuously. The three coal fired boilers in CSC were designed as capable of multi-fuel burning but its primary fuel is coal. The original designed coal is PCI coal from Australia. The NOx emission generating while using PCI coal is around 320 ppm and can,t meet the local EPA emission requirement set for year 2001, which is 300ppm. To cope with more stringent environmental requirement, the first stage strategy is to evaluate the NOx removal technologies and selecting the optimum one of them to fight against NOx emission. By means of MCDM (Multi-Criteria Decision-Making) methodologies, SNCR is chosen due to its simplicity and acceptable NOx-out ability. The 45% NOx reduction rate can be achieved and the control NOx final output will be lower than 200ppm, which is the promised level to the local EPA. In compromising the NOx reduction requirement and the practical running cost factor, the 240ppm NOx level has been determined for operating the SNCR system. The second stage of NOx reduction evaluation is focused on the coal brands selection. It¡As believed that through the right choose of suitable coal can offer the contribution to both environment and economic. After surveying the different coal composition analysis and carrying out real trial burn, the ADARO coal from Indonesia was picked up from competition and deem as the most environment friendly coal in terms of owning the optimum coal compositions and the lowest pollutants generation including NOx, SO2, as well as ash. As a result, the ADARO coal application is highly successful in the aspects of less pollutant generation and saving cost expenditure caused by the related environment equipment systems operation and maintenance. Obviously, the positive and close relationship between environment and economic has been proved. Base on the real evidence, this paper proves that by choosing the suitable methodologies, the NOx reduction can be accomplished to some extent. The whole environment can be benefited by this action and meanwhile the air pollution tax plus operation and maintenance cost can be reduced further. It¡As hoped that by announcing this paper, the outstanding performance of remarkable NOX reduction outcome and its coat saving advantage can be applied to the whole industrial field. Let¡As work together for the purpose of decreasing the pollutants emission, lightening the harms to the natural environment and fulfilling the duties of protection the all eco system. Key words: Nitrogen Oxide, Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction(SNCR), environmental coal, Multi-criteria decision-making(MCDM)