cognitive rationality, public engagement and quantitative
TRANSCRIPT
10/12/2013
1
MULTITUDE Final Conference, Naples December 4th, 2013
Cognitive Rationality,
Public Engagement and
Quantitative Analyses in
Transportation Decision-Making
Prof. Ennio Cascetta
Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
Dipartimento di Ingegneria dei Trasporti “L. Tocchetti”
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Decisions related to transportation systems, made by both public and private subjects are difficult to make Decisions impact on diverse and contrasting interests
The complexity of the legal procedures and the fragmentation of the
decision-makers system make them time-consuming and non-efficient
Decision on transportation systems often capture the public attention
Often, decisions on transportation systems do not perform as expected
background
10/12/2013
2
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Main causes
1. Unpredictable events modifying the scenario (deep uncertainty) Economic crisis 2008-2013, 9/11, oil prices, local changes,
unexpected market behaviour
2. Mistakes in forecasting times, costs and effects Implementation times and costsTraffic, revenues, costs,
pollution, etc.
3. Inability to implement the project as intended Protests against new infrastructures/services/fares, etc.
Failures in decision-making processes
PLANNING FAILURES
background
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TOWARDS DECISION-MAKING IN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
The decision-making process has some form of “rationality” and quantitative tools, i.e. statistical analyses and mathematical models, play a central role in it, contributing to define the decisions or at least influencing them. (Manheim, 1979; Meyer and Miller, 2001; Ortuzar and Willumsen, 2011; Cascetta, 2009) Transport system analysis and transportation planning are seen mostly as public-oriented activities, based on the simulation of alternative projects and the assessment of priorities.
…but this is often not the case
background
10/12/2013
3
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1
outline
Models of decision-making processes
Public Engagement
Quantitative Analyses and
their roles in decision-making
Some indications for quantitative analyses from the new persepctive
3
4
2
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
CLASSIFICATION
A-RATIONAL models
RATIONAL models
A sequence of activities performed by several actors (decision-makers and possibly stakeholders) in order to decide on options including not deciding (delaying)
TRANSPORT-RELATED DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
1. models of decision-making processes
10/12/2013
4
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1. models of decision-making processes
A-RATIONAL MODELS
The garbage can model (Cohen et al., 1972; Daft, 2001; Lipson, 2007)
The variables
Actors/participants(A) Problems (P) Solutions (S) Decision Opportunities (O)
Originally proposed for describing organizational decision-making processes in companies
O are the cans in which A throw P and S. The decision depends on the random coupling of P and S
Applications to public decision-making in transportation can be found in Cascetta and Cartenì (2012) on eco-rationality
O
P P
P
P
P P
P
P
P
P P P
P P
P P
P
S
S S S
S
S
S
S P
S
S
S S
S
S
S
A
A
O
P P
P
P
P P
P
P
P
P P P
P P
P P
P
S
S S S
S
S
S
S P
S
S
S S
S
S
S
A
A
O O
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1. models of decision-making processes
A-RATIONAL MODELS
The garbage can model
It deals with “organized anarchies”, i.e. organizations where there are three properties:
1) Choices are made on the basis of ill-posed and inconsistent ideas
2) A solution/idea could be proposed even if there is not a problem or it could contribute to define it. On the contrary, a problem could exist without being able to find a solution
3) Participation changes: different actors are involved over time
Non-efficiency, Instability, Lack of legitimization
10/12/2013
5
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1. models of decision-making processes
RATIONAL MODELS
• consistent - both internally w. r. t. the stated objectives and existing constraints, and externally
with other decisions (plans, projects) taken in other interacting contexts or at different moments in time
• comparative - considering one or more alternatives (e.g. not deciding, one of the available options,
searching for other possibilities)
• aware - based on unbiased information about the options (features), the context (physical
and decisional) and their likely impacts (costs, benefits, risks and opportunities), for technical, economic and administrative feasibility
Rationality: Acting in the best possible way considering the aim (Elster, 1986)
• flexible - open to changes due to new information on alternative options and their effects, to
changes in the economic, physical, institutional contexts, and taking into account decision “opportunity costs” (i.e. postponing unnecessary decisions)
Minimal Requirements of Rational decisions: (Cascetta et al., 2013)
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Strongly Rational model
Homo oeconomicus is a utility maximizer relative to his/her choices
Comprehensive (full enumeration of possible solutions)
Aware (evaluation of all the impacts)
Optimization algorithm (chosen solution is the one that maximize objectives and fulfill the constraints)
Conclusive
1. models of decision-making processes
RATIONAL MODELS
IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
IMPLEMENTATION
CHOICES
(PHASES)
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
- Transportation system
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENTED
OPTIONS
OPTIMALITY
TEST
PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION
NO
YES
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
10/12/2013
6
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
RATIONAL MODELS The cognitive or bounded rational approach
1. models of decision-making processes
“The Fox and
the Grapes” IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
IMPLEMENTATION
CHOICES
(PHASES)
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
- Transportation system
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
SATISFYSING
OBJECTIVES
IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
IMPLEMENTATION
CHOICES
(PHASES)
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
- Transportation system
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
SATISFYSING
OBJECTIVES
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENTED
OPTIONS
IMPLEMENTATION
1ST PHASE
IMPLEMENTATION
2ND PHASE
NO
YES
NO
YES
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENTED
OPTIONS
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
IMPLEMENTATION
CHOICES
(STAGES)
IMPLEMENTATION
CHOICES
(STAGES)
IMPLEMENTATION
1ST STAGE
IMPLEMENTATION
2ND STAGE
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
RATIONAL MODELS
Cognitive/Bounded Rational approach
It is loosely consistent with:
Bounded Rationality Choice Theory (Simon 1957; Rubinstein,
1999; Kahneman, 2003) (Behavioral Economics)
Learning Theory in Dynamic Decision-Making Models
(Brehemer, 1992; Gonzalez et al., 2003)
(Management science/Psychology)
Cognitive Processes in Decision-Making (Wang et al. 2003, 2007)
(Cognitive Sciences)
1. models of decision-making processes
10/12/2013
7
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Application areas of the cognitive/bounded rationality approach
Multiple (and possibly ill-posed) objectives, also related to
non-quantitative variables
Not exhaustive knowledge of the context variables/available
solutions
Impacts on multiple stakeholders
Several decision-makers with different agendas
Significant uncertainty in the simulated impacts
Opportunity/need to implement decisions in stages
1. models of decision-making processes
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
2
1
outline
Models of decision-making processes
Public Engagement
Quantitative Analyses and
their roles in decision-making
Some indications for quantitative analyses from the new persepctive
3
4
10/12/2013
8
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
2. public engagement
Public Engagement (PE) is the process of identifying and incorporating stakeholders’ concerns, needs and values in the transport decision-making process.
It is a two-way communication process promoting stakeholder interaction with the formal decision-makers and the transport project team.
The overall goal of engagement is to achieve a more transparent decision-making process with greater input from stakeholders and their support of the decisions (larger coalitions)
Stakeholders management is also studied in organization and management sciences (Clarkson, 1999)
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1. Stakeholders identification: e.g. authorities, local communities, etc.
2. Listening and stakeholders management: systematic analysis of the current social, cultural and economic conditions with a direct impact on stakeholders
3. Information communication: information relative to the project provided by the stakeholders
4. Consultation: decision-makers interact with the stakeholders in defining/evaluating alternatives
5. Participation: extension of the consultation level where the groups, directly interested, become joint partners of the project and in the project implementation. They take part in making the final choice
THE FIVE LEVELS OF PE
STAKEHOLDERS IDENTIFICATION
LISTENING AND
STAKEHOLDERS MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
CONSULTATION
PARTICIPATION
2. public engagement
10/12/2013
9
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES
INTEREST/POWER MATRIX
PO
WER
HIG
H
Institutional Stakeholder
(Identification)
Key Stakeholder
(Consultation/Participation)
LOW
Marginal Stakeholder
(Information communication)
Operative Stakeholder
(Active listening)
LOW HIGH
INTEREST
Stakeholders Empowerment
2. public engagement
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Limits of the DAD
It fosters consensus barriers
It increase costs
It increases times
THE ARCH-ENEMY OF PE: THE DAD (DECIDE, ANNOUNCE, DEFEND) SYNDROME (e.g. Susskind et al., 1983; Walker, 2009)
Administration makes a DECISION (the best project/plan), it ANNOUNCES the project to the population and other stakeholders that have not been involved previously. This produces many oppositions and the Administration is obligated to DEFEND the decision against criticism, accusations and controversy without having the opportunity to change the project (if only marginally)
2. public engagement
10/12/2013
10
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
3
1
outline
Models of decision-making processes
Public Engagement
Quantitative Analyses and
their roles in decision-making
Some indications for quantitative analyses from the new persepctive 4
2
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
1. Understanding and modeling mobility and transport related phenomena (mostly in physical terms)
2. To assist in the design, assessment and evaluation of transport-related decisions:
What If What To
TRADITIONAL ROLES OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ANALYSIS
3. To contribute towards reaching larger consensus through Public Engagement
(e.g. information-based PE)
4. To provide inputs for economic/financial plans of market operators
NEW ROLES
3. quantitative analyses and their roles
10/12/2013
11
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Quantitative analyses in a-rational decision-making play only a cosmetic role (if any)
PE and rational decision-making do not necessarily imply each other (e.g. DAD syndrome and PE based on pure “negotatiation”)
Cognitive model has the greater potential for integration with PE, both in public and private contexts
cognitive rationality, PE and quantitative analyses
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
The model proposed here is based on “three legs”:
Cognitive or Bounded rational decision-making processes
Public Engagement
Transportation System Analysis
cognitive rationality, PE and quantitative analyses
10/12/2013
12
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
-- Transportation system
IMPLEMENTATION
1° STAGE
NO
SI
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENT.
OPTIONS
DECISION-MAKING
PROCESS
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
three-legs model
SATISFYING
RESULTS
AND
CONSENSUS
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
-- Transportation system
IMPLEMENTATION
1° STAGE
NO
SI
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
STAKEHOLDER IDENTIFICATION
LISTENING AND STAKEHOLDER MANAG.
INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
AND CONSULTATION
INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENT.
OPTIONS
CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION
DECISION-MAKING
PROCESS STAKEHOLDERS ENGAGEMENT
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
three-legs model
SATISFYING
RESULTS
AND
CONSENSUS
10/12/2013
13
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
IDENTIFICATION OF
OBJECTIVES,
CONSTRAINTS AND
PROJECT TYPOLOGIES
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
(PLANS/PROJECTS)
SIMULATION AND
TECHNICAL
ASSESSMENT
PRESENT SITUATION
ANALYSIS
-Activity system
-- Transportation system
IMPLEMENTATION
1° STAGE
NO
SI
COMPARISON OF
ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
(ASSESSMENT/
EVALUATION)
STAKEHOLDER IDENTIFICATION
LISTENING AND STAKEHOLDER MANAG.
INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
AND CONSULTATION
INFORMATION COMMUNICATION
MONITORING
AND EX-POST
EVALUATION
OF
IMPLEMENT.
OPTIONS
CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION
DEMAND/SUPPLY INTERACTION MODELING AND SIMULATION IN REFERENCE SCENARIO
DEMAND/SUPPLY INTERACTION MODELING AND SIMULATION IN PROJECT SCENARIO
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS DECISION-MAKING
PROCESS STAKEHOLDERS ENGAGEMENT
TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM ANALYSIS
DECISION-MAKING
CONTEXT
IDENTIFICATION
three-legs model
DEMAND ANALYSIS AND MODELING
DEMAND/ SUPPLY INTERACTION MODELING AND SIMULATION
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING PLANNIG DOCUMENTS
INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATION ANALYIS
PASSENGER AND FREIGHT DEMAND ESTIMATION
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
IDENTIFICATION OF FUTURE SCENARIOS AND REFERENCE ONE
WEAKNESSES AND PLANNING STRATEGIES
INDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT SCENARIOS
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
SATISFYING
RESULTS
AND
CONSENSUS
DEMAND ANALYSIS AND MODELING
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
4
1
outline
Models of decision-making processes
Public Engagement
Quantitative Analyses and
their roles in decision-making
Some indications for quantitative analyses from the new persepctive
3
2
10/12/2013
14
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
4. some indications from the new perspective
To model the impacts relevant to stakeholders and decision-makers (e.g. being informed vs. average travel times)
To adopt assessment methods allowing the evaluation of both quantitative and qualitative impacts for different actors
To present results in ways that can be understood by non-experts
To quantify the uncertainty entailed in the simulation results and in the assessment methodology
To improve the capability to capture users’ willingness to pay for transport services
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
4. some indications from the new perspective
Standardization of procedures and DSS
Third-part assessment and performance comparison with base-rates
The (neglected) relevance of monitoring and ex-post studies
10/12/2013
15
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
Thank you for your attention!
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
basic references (1/4) Reference papers
Cascetta et al. (2013). A new look at planning and designing transportation systems: decision processes, stakeholders management and the role of quantitative methods, Transport Policy, under review.
Cascetta, E. (2011). Transportation planning: decision-making, public engagement and system engineering. SIDT International Conference. Venice.
Planning failures Flyvbjerg et al. (2005). How (In)accurate Are Demand Forecasts in Public Works
Projects: The Case of Transportation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2), 131–146.
Lemp, J. D., and K. M. Kockelman (2009). Understanding and Accommodating Risk and Uncertainty in Toll Road Projects: A Review of the Literature. Transportation Research Record, 2132, 106–112.
Buehler et al. (2010). The Planning Fallacy: Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Origins. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 1–62.
10/12/2013
16
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
basic references (2/4)
Decision-Making in Transportation and Models – RATIONAL MODELS
Simon, H. (1957). A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice, in Models of Man, Social and Rational: Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting. New York, Wiley.
Brehmer, B. (1992). Dynamic decision making: Human control of complex systems. Acta Psychologica, 81(3), 211–241.
Gonzalez, C., Lerch, J. F., & Lebiere, C. (2003). Instance-based learning in dynamic decision making. Cognitive Science, 27(4), 591–635.
Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review.
Wang, Y., and Ruhe, G. (2007). The Cognitive Process of Decision-Making. Int. Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 1(2), 73-85.
Decision-Making in Transportation and Models – A-RATIONAL MODELS
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., Olsen, J. P. (1972). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly.
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
basic references (3/4)
Decision-Making in Transportation and Models – PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Cascetta, E., Pagliara, F. (2013). Public engagement for planning and design transportation systems: tools and experiences, Proceedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 87.
Cascetta, E. (2011). Transportation planning: decision-making, public engagement and system engineering. SIDT International Conference. Venice.
Kelly, J., Jones, P., Barta, F., Hossinger, R., Witte, A., Christian, A. (2004). Successful transport decision-making – A project management and stakeholder engagement handbook. Guidemaps consortium.
Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics (1991). Principles of Stakeholder Management.
Susskind, L., Elliot, M. (1983). Paternalism, Conflict and Coproduction. Susskind and Elliot eds., Plenum Press, New York.
10/12/2013
17
Cognitive Rationality, Public Engagement and Quantitative Analyses in Transportation Decision-Making
Naples, December 4th, 2013
basic references (4/4)
The role of quantitative methods in transportation decision-making
Cascetta (2009). Transportation System Analysis: models and applications. 2nd edition. Springer.
CE Delft Report (2007). Handbook on estimation of external cost in the transport sector. EC DG Tren.
Cunningham, S. W., and van der Lei, T., E. (2007). Decision-Making for New Technology: A Multi-Actor, Multi-Objective Method. PICMET Proceedings. Portland.
Manheim (1979). Fundamentals of Transportation Systems Analysis, Volume 1: Basic Concepts (Transportation Studies). MIT Press
Meyer and Miller (2001). Urban Transportation Planning. 2nd edition. McGraw-Hill.
Ortuzar and Willumsen (2011). Modelling Transport. 4th edition. Wiley.
Saltelli et al. (2008). Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer. Great Britain. Wiley.
Sinha, K.C. and Labi, S. (2007). Transportation Decision Making. Principles of Project Evaluation and Programming. Wiley.