Tradeoff Weights Tradeoff weights refer weights of various trade attributes that are developed by using different methods or techniques such as direct method, swing weight method, equivalence lottery method, and hierarchical weight method.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Methods There are various advantages and disadvantages of using various methods like indifference trade-off method, swing weight method, direct weight method etc. for developing or calculating tradeoff weights. In the context of benefits, swing weight method is quick and easy to operate that can help the decision maker to make appropriate decision by developing effective tradeoff weights (Bekiaris & Nakanishi, 2004). In addition, all these methods are useful in a project for a decision maker in spatial decision problems. The main advantage of tradeoff analysis methods is the ability to provide different relative weights to each of the alternative or attributes. By using these methods, it is possible to derive weights from a ranking of limited alternatives and easy to achieve an agreement between decision makers. On the other hand, historical weights are still valid in decision and risk analysis that can be helpful to effectively develop tradeoff weights (Guinto, 2008). At the same time, there are some disadvantages of using these methods for developing tradeoff weights. Some of them are as follow:
 There is no assurance that swing weight method provides accurate eliciting weights.
 Some of these methods are difficult to calculate appropriate tradeoff weights.
 These methods are useful to determine tradeoff weights, but at the same time, not useful to measure risks associated with different attributes (Bekiaris & Nakanishi, 2004).
Methods of Tradeoff Analysis
There are various methods that are useful to develop or calculate tradeoff weights. Some of these methods are as follow:
Direct Method: Direct weight method identifies salient and valuable attributes that is used to determine rating by calculating weights of each tradeoff attributes. Direct weight method is more useful for tradeoff analysis, when lots of information is available with fair degree of certainty (Malczewski, 1999). It is a most useful method of weighting trade-offs, but at the same time, without adequate information, it can be difficult to make comparison by determining rating. In this method, direct trade-offs are assessed between different pair and alternatives to make comparison. In the case of optimal outcome, decision marker can determine tradeoff weight by calculating values of each of the alternatives. On the other hand, direct rating method is also helpful for making comparison by estimating weights of each attribute on the basis of predetermined scale (Drobne & Lisec, 2009).
Swing Weight Method: In addition, swing weight method is also available that is useful for eliciting weights for various criteria of multi criteria analysis or tradeoff analysis. It is based on the comparison of different ranges of variation of an attribute and can be useful for non-qualitative attributes (Guinto, 2008). Swing weight method forces decision makers to consider values of attribute’s ranges in decision making and risk analysis process. In this method, actual weights of attributes are determined by dividing each value form the sum of all values. Swing weight method provides much more reliable results to decision maker as compared to assigning weights. In the case of optimal result, swing weight method is used to determine tradeoff weights by determining ranking of each of the attributes.
Equivalence Lottery Method: Equivalence lottery method is a procedure that is useful to determine decision maker’s ability for an amount of money by comparing two hypothetical alternatives including gamble (Cascetta, 2009). This method is used to determine appropriate utility values for all of the possible payoffs of a problem in terms of highest possible payoff i.e. 1 and lowest possible payoff i.e. 0. In this method, two alternatives are selected as the best option and worst option by a decision maker for determining best optimum solution on the basis of probability of either alternatives or events. Equivalence lottery method can be helpful for decision maker to identify best option in lottery gamble.
Qualitative Approach v/s Quantitative Approach In tradeoff analysis, both qualitative approach and quantitative approach are used for developing tradeoffs weights. There are some differences between qualitative and quantitative approach. Qualitative approach or criteria for weighting trade-offs are more subjective as compared to analytical. In this approach, qualitative data or information is more meaningful and easy to understand for people or decision markers (Katrina, Adger, Tompkins, Bacon, Shim & Young, 2001). Qualitative approach mainly emphasis on attitudes, behavior, and experiences in research fields within the tradeoff analysis. In this approach, information on each of the alternative relative to each decision factor is presented on matrix, while in the case of quantitative approach, it is displayed in matrix. On the other hand, quantitative approach or method is more analytical and uses calculation, figures, and facts to determine tradeoff weights. Quantitative approach is often clear that can provide faster analysis of data and better understanding of expected outcomes. In this approach, various methods or techniques are used to determine outcomes. In the case of trade-off analysis, quantitative approach is used or applied in swing weigh method, direct method, and indifference tradeoff method for developing tradeoff weights (Liu, 2009).

References
Bekiaris, E & Nakanishi, Y.J. (2004). Economic impacts of intelligent transportation systems: innovations and case studies. Netherland: Elsevier.
Cascetta, E, (2009). Transportation Systems Analysis: Models and Applications (2nd ed.). NewYork: Springer.
Drobne, S & Lisec, A. (2009). Multi-attribute Decision Analysis in GIS: Weighted Linear Combination and Ordered Weighted Averaging. Informatica, 33, 459–474.
Guinto, D.R. (2008). Multicriteria decision-making and the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. USA: ProQuest.
Katrina, B., Adger, W.N., Tompkins, E., Bacon, P., Shim, D & Young, K. (2001). Trade-off analysis for marine protected area management. Ecological Economics, 37, 417–434.
Liu, H.H. (2009). Software Performance and Scalability: A Quantitative Approach. USA: John Wiley and Sons.
Malczewski, J. (1999). GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. USA: John Wiley and Sons.