基于最大偏差原则的群体性事件应急管理绩效评价模型

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2016.04.016

中国管理科学 ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (4): 138-147.doi: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2016.04.016

基于最大偏差原则的群体性事件应急管理绩效评价模型

刘德海^1,2

1. 东北财经大学管理科学与工程学院, 辽宁大连 116025;
2. 东北财经大学经济计量分析与预测研究中心, 辽宁大连 116025

收稿日期:2014-03-12 修回日期:2015-02-14 出版日期:2016-04-20 发布日期:2016-04-29
通讯作者: 刘德海(1974-),男(汉族),辽宁辽阳人,东北财经大学管理科学与工程学院教授,博导,研究方向:博弈论、社会突发事件问题,E-mail:Ldhai2001@163.com. E-mail:Ldhai2001@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(71571033,71271045);东北财经大学学科建设支持计划特色学科项目(XKT-201411)

Performance Evaluation Two-tuple Linguistic Model in Emergency Management of Mass Incident Based Maximal Deviation Principle

LIU De-hai^1,2

1. School of Management Science and Engineering, Dongbei University of Finance & Economics, Dalian 116025, China;
2. Center of Econometric Analysis and Forecasting, Dongbei University of Finance & Economics, Dalian 116025, China

Received:2014-03-12 Revised:2015-02-14 Online:2016-04-20 Published:2016-04-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 群体性突发事件应急管理绩效评价具有价值判断冲突性、结构嵌入性和语义模糊性等非常规特征。针对群体性突发事件的矛盾对抗性特征,根据"着重解决群众反映意见较大的突出问题"的善后处置原则,构建了基于最大偏差原则的多属性评价模型。首先,在社会结构、应急策略和评价指标等多重维度下,构建了件应急管理绩效评价指标体系,包括效率、公平、收敛性、稳定性和适应性。其次,针对价值判断冲突特征,提出基于最大偏差原则的二元语义信息处理方法:偏差越大,表明该属性能够更好的反映出事态冲突性,应赋予越高的权重。最后,结合某住宅小区锅炉房拆迁案例的全样本调查数据进行实证分析。结果表明,相对于模糊综合评价模型和最小偏差原则的二元语义模型,基于最大偏差原则更能反映出群体性突发事件应急管理绩效评价的价值冲突性。

关键词: 群体性突发事件, 二元语义绩效评价, 应急管理, 最大偏差原则, 多属性决策

Abstract: How to evaluate the emergency management performance of mass incident is the key problem for policymaker to improve the social management. Performance evaluation of emergency management in mass incident has the unconventional characteristics with conflict of value judgment among stockholders, structural embedability that a mass incident happens in the special context of social structure, and linguistic fuzziness about the evaluation information. Considering the conflict of value judgment among local governmental officer, social vulnerable group and interest group, the 2-tuple linguistic model of performance evaluation is proposed with the maximal deviation principle.Firstly, the index system of performance evaluation of emergency management is build under the dimensions of social structure, emergent strategy and evaluating index, which includes efficiency, equity, convergence, stability and flexibility. Secondly, in accord with the disposal principles declared by Chinese government that local government should "facilitate the resolution of the outstanding issues with worse public opinion", the attribute should be given the higher weight because the larger deviation is, the better reflecting the conflict. Choosing the survey data of the boiler house demolition case in 2011 Dalian city, three multi-attribute decision-making models are compared with each others and the index sensitivity analysis is discussed. The strategy of neutral government as intercessor and the far-sighted strategy have the better performance, and the tit-for-tat strategy has the worst performance. Relative to fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model and 2-tuple linguistic model with the minimal deviation principle, the maximal deviation principle is better reflected the conflict characteristic of value judgment. The contribution of this paper is a new problem in the field of emergency management is proposed, which is how to evaluate the emergency management performance of mass incident with conflict of value judgment among stockholders. The resolving method should be maximal deviation principle, which can reflect the conflict of value judgment.

Key words: mass incident, 2-tuple linguistic performance evaluation, emergency management, maximal deviation principle, multiple attribute decision making

中图分类号:

C934

刘德海. 基于最大偏差原则的群体性事件应急管理绩效评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(4): 138-147.

LIU De-hai. Performance Evaluation Two-tuple Linguistic Model in Emergency Management of Mass Incident Based Maximal Deviation Principle[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2016, 24(4): 138-147.

参考文献

[1] Rosenthal U, Charles M T, Hart P T. Coping with crises: the management of disasters, riots and terrorism[M]. Springville:Charles C Thomas Pub. Ltd., 1989.

[2] 刘德海,政府不同应急管理模式下群体性突发事件的演化分析[J]. 系统工程理论与实践,2010,30(11):1968-1976.

[3] 刘铭传,王玲.政府应急管理组织绩效评测模型研究[J].哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版),2006,8(1):64-68.

[4] Wang Shouyang, Yu L, Lai K K. Crude oil price forecasting with TEI@I methodology[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 2005,18(2):145-166.

[5] Zhang Guangquan, Ma Jun, Lu Jie. Emergency management evaluation by a fuzzy multi-criteria group decision support system[J]. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2009,23(4): 517-527.

[6] 刘德海, 于倩, 马晓南, 等. 基于最小偏差组合权重的突发事件应急能力评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(11): 79-86.

[7] Herrera F, Martinez L. A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words [J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2000, 8(6): 746-752.

[8] 廖貅武, 李垣, 董广茂. 一种处理语言评价信息的多属性群决策方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践,2006,26(9): 90-98.

[9] 王欣荣, 樊治平. 基于二元语义信息处理的一种语言群决策方法[J]. 管理科学学报,2003, 6(5): 1-5.

[10] 徐泽水. 语言多属性决策的目标规划模型[J]. 管理科学学报, 2006, 9(2): 9-16.

[11] Dong Yucheng, Xu Yinfeng, Li Hongyi. On consistency measures of linguistic preference relations[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2008, 189(2): 430-444.

[12] 刘德海. 群体性事件的演化与评估[M]. 北京:中国社会科学出版社,2012.

[13] 新华社. 着力解决群众反映强烈突出问题. 解放日报, 2011-01-12日.

[14] Granovetter M. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness [J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1985, 91(3): 481-510.

[15] 刘德海.群体性突发事件中政府机会主义行为的演化博弈分析[J].中国管理科学, 2010, 18(1):175-183.

[16] Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Emergency Management Association.State Capability Assessment for Readiness (CAR). Working Paper,Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Emergency Management Association,1997.

[17] 罗成琳, 李向阳. 突发性群体事件及其演化机理分析[J]. 中国软科学, 2009,(6):163-177.

[18] 刘德海, 王维国. 维权型群体性突发事件社团网络结构与策略的协同演化机制[J]. 中国管理科学, 2012, 20 (3): 185-192.

[19] Sandbu M E. Fairness and the roads not taken: An experimental test of non-reciprocal set-dependence in distributive preferences[J]. Games and Economic Behavior, 2007, 61(1): 113-130.

[20] Rückert U, Raedt L D. An experimental evaluation of simplicity in rule learning[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2008,172(1):19-28.

[21] 徐寅峰,刘德海.群体性突发事件产生根源的主观博弈分析[J]. 预测,2004, 23(6): 43-45.

[22] Stahl D O. Rule learning in symmetric normal-form games: theory and evidence[J]. Games and Economic Behavior, 2000,32(1):105-138.

[23] Young P, Foster D. Stochstic evolutionary game dynamics[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1990, 38(2): 219-232.

[24] Heller D. An evolutionary approach to learning in a changing environment[J]. Journal of Economic Theory, 2004, 114(1): 31-55.

[25] 胡百精.中国危机管理报告(2006)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007.

[26] 韩志明. 利益表达、资源动员与议程设置:对于"闹大"现象的描述性分析[J]. 公共管理学报, 2012, 9(2): 52-66.

[27] Herrera F, Martinez L. The 2-tuple linguistic computational model versus the computational model based on the extension principle. Analysis of the Linguistic Description, Accuracy and Consistency . working Paper, Department of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Granada, 2000.

[28] Xu Zeshui. Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making [J]. Omega, 2005, 33(3): 249-254.

[29] Xu Zeshui. Group decision making based on multiple types of linguistic preference relations [J]. Information Sciences, 2008, 178(2): 452-467.

[30] Kapferer B, Strategy and transaction in an african factory [M].Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 1972.

[31] 樊金石. 数十业主挡住卡车去路. 半岛晨报,2011-5-24.

基于最大偏差原则的群体性事件应急管理绩效评价模型

Performance Evaluation Two-tuple Linguistic Model in Emergency Management of Mass Incident Based Maximal Deviation Principle

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	李鹏, 沈志杰. 基于Heronian平均算子的Pythagorean模糊不确定语言决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2021, 29(1): 217-225.
[2]	张鼎华, 李卫俊, 李丞, 申世飞. 基于深度学习的多维情景空间下群体性事件分析与预测研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(8): 172-180.
[3]	张发明, 王伟明. 基于后悔理论和DEMATEL的语言型多属性决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(6): 201-210.
[4]	宋民雪, 刘德海. 群体性突发事件化解机制的随机演化博弈模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(4): 142-152.
[5]	王熹徽, 张文鑫, 余玉刚, 刘兵兵. 考虑灾民痛苦感知的应急避难所选址与物资分配优化[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(12): 162-172.
[6]	范建平, 刘胜男, 吴美琴. 单值Neutrosophic sets环境下基于参照系数的VIKOR方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(6): 136-145.
[7]	张健. 基于HTFWGBM算子的供应商选择模型研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(3): 137-143.
[8]	曾守桢, 穆志民. 基于混合加权距离的毕达哥拉斯模糊TOPSIS多属性决策方法研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(3): 198-205.
[9]	潘亚虹, 耿秀丽. 基于Mo-RVIKOR的混合多属性决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(12): 143-151.
[10]	余高锋, 李登峰, 吴坚, 叶银芳. 考虑决策者损失规避的异质信息多属性变权决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(9): 141-147.
[11]	李春好, 李巍, 何娟, 李孟姣, 马慧欣. 目标导向层次分析方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(9): 170-182.
[12]	徐海军, 田晓丽, 徐泽水. 基于犹豫模糊语言信息的前景决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(8): 179-185.
[13]	李春好, 李孟姣, 田硕. 属性集容量确定的夹挤式测度模式及其推算模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(3): 117-125.
[14]	吴鹏, 强韶华, 高庆宁. 基于SOAR模型的网民群体负面情感建模研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(3): 126-138.
[15]	赵容, 刘克艳, 任佩瑜. 路段通行能力不同的避难点选址模型及算法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(9): 133-140.