Clarifying the debate on selection methods for engineering: Arrow’s impossibility theorem, design performances, and information basis

Abstract

To demystify the debate about the validity of selection methods that utilize aggregation procedures, it is necessary that contributors to the debate are explicit about (a) their personal goals and (b) their methodological aims. We introduce three additional points of clarification: (1) the need to differentiate between the aggregation of preferences and of performances, (2) the application of Arrow’s theorem to performance measures rather than to preferences, and (3) the assumptions made about the information that is available in applying selection methods. The debate about decision methods in engineering design would be improved if all contributors were more explicit about these issues.