Do you want Sustainable Decision Making Assignment Questions? No worry, Casestudyhelp.net is a top assignment writing help service provider. Cover all kinds of assignments, such as Management, Business Management, Brand Management, etc., at a reasonable price with AI-free, plagiarism-free content, or deliver 24/7 live chat support for students.
Assignment Details:
- Topic : sustainable decision making
- Document Type: Case Study
- Subject: Management
- Words Count: 2500
- Citation/Referencing Style: harvard
- Academic Standard Level: Master’s
Assessment Aim
- To synthesise and apply decision-making tools in a context that reflects the complexities of real-world sustainability challenges.
- To showcase critical thinking, analysis, and justification of the chosen approaches.
- To evaluate the impact of proposed decisions on diverse stakeholders.
Task
Prepare a report to address the four parts of the question below:
Part 1: Case Study Selection and Context
Choose a Sustainability-Focused Project
- It can be an existing project (e.g., renewable energy initiative, infrastructure development, resource management program) or a hypothetical scenario grounded in realistic assumptions.
- Provide the context, background, and key sustainability goals of the project.
Identify Main Stakeholders
- Outline key stakeholders (e.g., government bodies, local communities, investors, NGOs) and their interests.
- Discuss any potential conflicts or synergies among stakeholders.
Assess the Sustainability Dimensions
- Briefly highlight the social, economic, and environmental dimensions relevant to your case study.
Deliverable: A brief statement describing the project context, sustainability objectives, and stakeholder landscape (approx. 250 words) and a table identifying key stakeholders, their interests and any potential conflicts or synergies among stakeholders
Part 2: Method Selection and Rationale
Identify two decision-making tools studied in this module that you will use to evaluate the identified case study. One of the tools should be either CBA or MCDA. You should:
-
- Provide a clear rationale for why you have chosen these tools are most appropriate, considering your project’s complexity, stakeholder needs, and data availability.
- Evaluate their strengths and limitations in a sustainability context
- Briefly discuss how you will handle risk or uncertainty (e.g., sensitivity analysis, risk assessment frameworks)
Deliverable: A method justification report (approx. 500 words) explaining why and how you plan to use these tools.
Part 3: Application of Tools
Data Collection and Assumptions
- Describe the data you have gathered or assumed (cost estimates, potential benefits, performance metrics, etc.).
- State any assumptions you make and the rationale behind them (e.g., discount rate, time horizon, weighting criteria, or intangible benefits).
Implementation of Selected Decision-Making Tools
For each of your selected decision-making tools you should:
- Demonstrate how you set up and conduct the analysis (e.g., steps of CBA or the weighting, scoring, and aggregation steps of MCDA).
- Present and interpret your results, including financial or multi-criteria outcomes.
Risk and Sensitivity
- If feasible, perform a brief sensitivity or risk analysis on key variables.
- Reflect on how changes in assumptions might alter your final recommendations.
Deliverable: A detailed analytical section (approx. 1000 words) presenting the use of your selected decision support tools, complete with calculations, tables, or figures.
Part 4: Conclusions and Recommendations
Comparative Discussion
- Compare results from the tools and highlight any discrepancies or areas of agreement.
- Discuss how these results inform the sustainability outcomes for your project.
Final Recommendations
- Provide a clear, justified recommendation for the project decision (e.g., whether to proceed, revise scope, or implement additional measures).
- Reflect on the broader sustainability implications.
Evaluation of Decision-Making Tools
- Critically assess the suitability and limitations of your chosen tools.
- Propose improvements or further research areas.
Deliverable: A cohesive conclusion and recommendation section (approx. 750 words) synthesising insights and charting a path forward.
Guidelines
Your submission should be a maximum of 2500 words in length (+/- 10%) excluding cover page, contents page, tables, references and appendices (if included).
Please make sure that you correctly cite and reference all secondary sources you use, and include a reference list. The reference list will not be included in your final word count.
Reference books
- Rogers, M. & Duffy, A. (2012): Engineering Project Appraisal, Pages 107–120: CBA Methodology and Examples. (WO 1,2). Available at:
- Moran, D. and Sherrington, C. (2007) ‘An economic assessment of windfarm power generation in Scotland including externalities’, Energy policy, 35(5), pp. 2811–2825. (WO1) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2019.09.004
- Skenteris, K. et al. (2019): Valuing the Visual Impact of Wind Farms in Greece. Economic Analysis and Policy, 64, pp. 248–258. (WO2) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2019.09.004
- Meyerhoff, J. et al. (2010): Landscape Externalities from Onshore Wind Power. Energy Policy, 38(1), pp. 82–92. (WO3) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.08.055
- Gibbons, S. (2015) ‘Gone with the wind: Valuing the visual impacts of wind turbines through house prices’, Journal of environmental economics and management, 72, pp. 177–196. (WO1) Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2015.04.006.
