We examine the differences in current use patterns, discuss the reasons for and implications of such differences, and investigate whether observed differences in use are necessary. The result of our survey shows that weighting and valuation is broadly used in the examined ESATs. The use of weighting/valuation methods is different in different tools, but these differences are not always related to the application; rather, they are related to traditions and views on valuation and weighting.
Also, although the requirements on the weights/values may differ between tools, there are intersections where they coincide. Monetary weights, using either endpoint or midpoint methods, are found to be useful in all the selected tools. Furthermore, the inventory shows that that there is a common need for generic sets of weights.
There is a need for further research focusing on the development of consistent value sets derived with a wide range of methods. In parallel to the development of weighting methods it is important with critical evaluations of the weighting sets with regard to scientific quality, consistency and data gaps.
Read article here (external link)
