A novel hierarchical dynamic group decision-based fuzzy ranking approach to evaluate the green road construction suppliers

Articles in Press

Document Type : Article

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Karaj Branch, Karaj, Iran

2 Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, Amirkabir University of Technology, 424 Hafez Ave., Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In recent years, sustainable development and environmental protection are getting more attention in construction projects. Hence, green road construction (GRC) supplier selection problem is the main key for organizations to grow their environmental and economical performances. Accordingly, a new hierarchical group decision fuzzy ranking framework is presented based on dynamic interval-valued hesitant fuzzy numbers (DIVHFN) and last aggregation approach to select the most appropriate GRC supplier. Thereby, DIVHFN theory and last aggregation concept could decrease the judgmental errors and data loss, respectively. Moreover, the weight of each criterion is obtained by proposing a new dynamic interval-valued hesitant fuzzy maximize deviation from ideal decision (DIVHF-MDfID) method. Furthermore, the experts' weight is determined by presenting a dynamic interval-valued hesitant fuzzy preference assessment (DIVHF-PA) method. Besides, to reach precise weights the opinions of experts are included in criteria/sub-criteria weights computations. Meanwhile, an actual case regarding GRC supplier evaluation and selection problem for a construction project is provided to detect the implementation process of the proposed approach. Finally, some comparative and sensitivity analysis are performed to confirm the validation and verification of the presented DIVHF-hierarchical group decision (DIVHF-HGD) approach.

Keywords

References

  1. References

    1. Moňoková, A. and S. Vilčeková. Sustainable Construction-Environmental Impacts Assessment of Architectural Elements and Building Services. in International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa. 2020. Trans Tech Publ.
    2. Nikkhah, A., S. Firouzi, K. Dadaei, et al., ‘‘Measuring circularity in food supply chain using life cycle assessment; Refining Oil from Olive Kernel’’. Foods. 10(3), pp. 590 (2021).
    3. Azhiguzhayeva, A., Z. Basshieva, and Z. Malgarayeva, ‘‘Economic Efficiency of Housing Construction. Environmental Impact’’. Journal of Environmental Management & Tourism. 12(3 (51)), pp. 703-717 (2021).
    4. Metham, M., V. Benjaoran, and A. Sedthamanop, ‘‘An evaluation of Green Road Incentive Procurement in road construction projects by using the AHP’’. International Journal of Construction Management, pp. 1-13 (2019).
    5. Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., M. Amiri, M. Hashemi-Tabatabaei, et al., ‘‘A New Decision-Making Approach Based on Fermatean Fuzzy Sets and WASPAS for Green Construction Supplier Evaluation’’. Mathematics. 8(12), pp. 2202 (2020).
    6. Shojaei, P., ‘‘Rough MCDM model for green supplier selection in Iran: a case of university construction project’’. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, (2020).
    7. Pitchipoo, P., P. Venkumar, and S. Rajakarunakaran. Development of fuzzy expert system for supplier evaluation and selection. in Advances in Engineering, Science and Management (ICAESM), 2012 International Conference on. 2012. IEEE.
    8. Yazdani, M., P. Chatterjee, D. Pamucar, et al., ‘‘A risk-based integrated decision-making model for green supplier selection: A case study of a construction company in Spain’’. Kybernetes, (2019).
    9. Ma, W., W. Lei, and B. Sun, ‘‘Three-way group decisions under hesitant fuzzy linguistic environment for green supplier selection’’. Kybernetes, (2020).
    10. Lu, J., J. Ma, G. Zhang, et al., ‘‘Theme-based comprehensive evaluation in new product development using fuzzy hierarchical criteria group decision-making method’’. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics. 58(6), pp. 2236-2246 (2011).
    11. Tsai, C.-C., ‘‘A research on selecting criteria for new green product development project: taking Taiwan consumer electronics products as an example’’. Journal of Cleaner Production. 25, pp. 106-115 (2012).
    12. Oh, J., J. Yang, and S. Lee, ‘‘Managing uncertainty to improve decision-making in NPD portfolio management with a fuzzy expert system’’. Expert Systems with Applications. 39(10), pp. 9868-9885 (2012).
    13. Cho, J. and J. Lee, ‘‘Development of a new technology product evaluation model for assessing commercialization opportunities using Delphi method and fuzzy AHP approach’’. Expert Systems with Applications. 40(13), pp. 5314-5330 (2013).
    14. Driessen, P.H., B. Hillebrand, R.A. Kok, et al., ‘‘Green new product development: the pivotal role of product greenness’’. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 60(2), pp. 315-326 (2013).
    15. Marmier, F., I.F. Deniaud, and D. Gourc, ‘‘Strategic decision-making in NPD projects according to risk: Application to satellites design projects’’. Computers in Industry. 65(8), pp. 1107-1114 (2014).
    16. Lin, C.-Y., A.H. Lee, and H.-Y. Kang, ‘‘An integrated new product development framework–an application on green and low-carbon products’’. International journal of systems science. 46(4), pp. 733-753 (2015).
    17. Büyüközkan, G. and S. Güleryüz, ‘‘A new integrated intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making approach for product development partner selection’’. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 102, pp. 383-395 (2016).
    18. Akhavan, P., S.M. Hosseini, and M. Abbasi, ‘‘Selecting new product development team members with knowledge sharing approach: A fuzzy bi-objective optimization model’’. Program. 50(2), pp. 195-214 (2016).
    19. Afrouzy, Z.A., S.H. Nasseri, I. Mahdavi, et al., ‘‘A fuzzy stochastic multi-objective optimization model to configure a supply chain considering new product development’’. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 40(17-18), pp. 7545-7570 (2016).
    20. Relich, M. and P. Pawlewski, ‘‘A fuzzy weighted average approach for selecting portfolio of new product development projects’’. Neurocomputing. 231, pp. 19-27 (2017).
    21. Abu, N.H., K.K. Huat, and M. Mansor. Implementation of Green New Product Development Among SMEs: Barriers and Critical Success Factors. in MATEC Web of Conferences. 2018. EDP Sciences.
    22. Oliveira, G.A., K.H. Tan, and B.T. Guedes, ‘‘Lean and green approach: An evaluation tool for new product development focused on small and medium enterprises’’. International Journal of Production Economics. 205, pp. 62-73 (2018).
    23. Pun, K.P., J. Rotanson, C. Chee-wah, et al., ‘‘Application of fuzzy integrated FMEA with product lifetime consideration for new product development in flexible electronics industry’’. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management. 12(1), pp. 176-200 (2019).
    24. Chettibi, S. and S. Chikhi, ‘‘Dynamic fuzzy logic and reinforcement learning for adaptive energy efficient routing in mobile ad-hoc networks’’. Applied Soft Computing. 38, pp. 321-328 (2016).
    25. Mardani, A., E.K. Zavadskas, D. Streimikiene, et al., ‘‘Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy saving technologies and solutions in five star hotels: A new hierarchical framework’’. Energy. 117, pp. 131-148 (2016).
    26. Mousavi, M., H. Gitinavard, and S. Mousavi, ‘‘A soft computing based-modified ELECTRE model for renewable energy policy selection with unknown information’’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 68, pp. 774-787 (2017).
    27. Büyüközkan, G. and S. Güleryüz, ‘‘Evaluation of Renewable Energy Resources in Turkey using an integrated MCDM approach with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations’’. Energy. 123, pp. 149-163 (2017).
    28. Jayaraman, R., D. Liuzzi, C. Colapinto, et al., ‘‘A fuzzy goal programming model to analyze energy, environmental and sustainability goals of the United Arab Emirates’’. Annals of Operations Research. 251(1-2), pp. 255-270 (2017).
    29. Wang, E., N. Alp, J. Shi, et al., ‘‘Multi-criteria building energy performance benchmarking through variable clustering based compromise TOPSIS with objective entropy weighting’’. Energy. 125, pp. 197-210 (2017).
    30. Sindhu, S., V. Nehra, and S. Luthra, ‘‘Solar energy deployment for sustainable future of India: Hybrid SWOC-AHP analysis’’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 72, pp. 1138-1151 (2017).
    31. Xiang, L., ‘‘Energy network dispatch optimization under emergency of local energy shortage with web tool for automatic large group decision-making’’. Energy. 120, pp. 740-750 (2017).
    32. Gomes, I., R. Melicio, V. Mendes, et al., ‘‘Decision making for sustainable aggregation of clean energy in day-ahead market: Uncertainty and risk’’. Renewable Energy, (2018).
    33. Lu, P., X. Yang, and Z.-J. Wang, ‘‘Fuzzy Group Consensus Decision Making and Its Use in Selecting Energy-Saving and Low-Carbon Technology Schemes in Star Hotels’’. International journal of environmental research and public health. 15(9), pp. 2057 (2018).
    34. Kofinas, P., A. Dounis, and G. Vouros, ‘‘Fuzzy Q-Learning for multi-agent decentralized energy management in microgrids’’. Applied Energy. 219, pp. 53-67 (2018).
    35. Jeong, J.S. and Á. Ramírez-Gómez, ‘‘Optimizing the location of a biomass plant with a fuzzy-DEcision-MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (F-DEMATEL) and multi-criteria spatial decision assessment for renewable energy management and long-term sustainability’’. Journal of Cleaner Production. 182, pp. 509-520 (2018).
    36. Ren, J., ‘‘Sustainability prioritization of energy storage technologies for promoting the development of renewable energy: A novel intuitionistic fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment approach’’. Renewable Energy. 121, pp. 666-676 (2018).
    37. Fathipour, F. and M. Saidi-Mehrabad, ‘‘A multi-objective energy planning considering sustainable development by a TOPSIS-based augmented e-constraint’’. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy. 10(3), pp. 034901 (2018).
    38. Wang, L., J.-j. Peng, and J.-q. Wang, ‘‘A multi-criteria decision-making framework for risk ranking of energy performance contracting project under picture fuzzy environment’’. Journal of Cleaner Production. 191, pp. 105-118 (2018).
    39. Peng, D.-H. and H. Wang, ‘‘Dynamic hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators in multi-period decision making’’. Kybernetes. 43(5), pp. 715-736 (2014).
    40. Awasthi, A., S.S. Chauhan, and S. Goyal, ‘‘A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers’’. International Journal of Production Economics. 126(2), pp. 370-378 (2010).
    41. Grisi, R.M., L. Guerra, and G. Naviglio, Supplier performance evaluation for green supply chain management, in Business Performance Measurement and Management. 2010, Springer. p. 149-163.
    42. Kuo, R., Y. Wang, and F. Tien, ‘‘Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection’’. Journal of Cleaner Production. 18(12), pp. 1161-1170 (2010).
    43. Cao, H. The study of the suppliers evaluating and choosing strategies based on the green supply chain management. in Business Management and Electronic Information (BMEI), 2011 International Conference on. 2011. IEEE.
    44. Yeh, W.-C. and M.-C. Chuang, ‘‘Using multi-objective genetic algorithm for partner selection in green supply chain problems’’. Expert Systems with Applications. 38(4), pp. 4244-4253 (2011).
    45. Tseng, M.-L., ‘‘Green supply chain management with linguistic preferences and incomplete information’’. Applied Soft Computing. 11(8), pp. 4894-4903 (2011).
    46. Büyüközkan, G. and G. Çifçi, ‘‘A novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for sustainable supplier selection with incomplete information’’. Computers in Industry. 62(2), pp. 164-174 (2011).
    47. Büyüközkan, G. and G. Çifçi, ‘‘A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers’’. Expert Systems with Applications. 39(3), pp. 3000-3011 (2012).
    48. Govindan, K., R. Khodaverdi, and A. Jafarian, ‘‘A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach’’. Journal of Cleaner Production. 47, pp. 345-354 (2013).
    49. Yue, Z., ‘‘An extended TOPSIS for determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers’’. Knowledge-Based Systems. 24(1), pp. 146-153 (2011).
    50. Ervural, B.C., S. Zaim, O.F. Demirel, et al., ‘‘An ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS-based SWOT analysis for Turkey’s energy planning’’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, (2017).
    51. Çolak, M. and İ. Kaya, ‘‘Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey’’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 80, pp. 840-853 (2017).
    52. Galchynska, J., Y. Larina, O. Varchenko, et al., ‘‘Perspectives of Ukrainian bioenergy development: estimation by means of cluster analysis and marketing approach’’. Economic Annals-XXI. 187 (2021).
    53. Astanakulov, O., K. Asatullaev, N. Saidaxmedova, et al., ‘‘The energy efficiency of the national economy assessment in terms of investment in green energy’’. Economic Annals-ХХI. 189, pp. 26-34 (2021).
Scientia Iranica

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 23 January 2022

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 16 April 2021
  • Revise Date: 04 December 2021
  • Accept Date: 23 January 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics