Possible bias in multi-actor multi-criteria transportation evaluation: issues and solutions

Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) has proven to be a suitable tool for the evaluation of transport projects. It allows to incorporate explicitly the aims and views of the actors involved, which is essential in the context of transport appraisal issues where stakeholders are getting increasingly involved in the decision process. If their interests are not involved or not taken into account, action groups may emerge in order to eventually prevent the implementation of the decision that is taken. MAMCA, as an extension of a traditional multi-criteria analysis, does not require monetary values but is able to work with all types of quantitative and even qualitative inputs in a multi-actor choicecontext. In the context of sustainable mobility and sustainable logistics this kind of evaluation tool is more and more needed. Different alternative solutions to a problem are evaluated according to multiple criteria, so as to eventually determine which one of them is the preferred option. The method does not replace the policy maker, but allows him to come to a judgment in an informed and balanced manner. In this paper, the authors aim to analyze whether it is possible to identify a potential bias in a MAMCA model and how to cope with it. This exploration will be structured according to three main axes: the choice of the actors (will the inclusion or exclusion of certain stakeholders change the outcome?), the choice of the criteria of each actor, and the choice of the weights of these criteria by the actors. Finally, possible solutions in order to avoid strategic bias in MAMCA will be proposed.