IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i9p2057-d170920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzy Group Consensus Decision Making and Its Use in Selecting Energy-Saving and Low-Carbon Technology Schemes in Star Hotels

Author

Listed:
  • Ping Lu

    (School of Economic and Management, Xiamen University of Technology, Xiamen 361024, China
    Department of Information Management, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan 32003, Taiwan)

  • Xuan Yang

    (Dongfang College, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Haining 314408, Zhejiang, China)

  • Zhou-Jing Wang

    (School of Information, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

Energy-saving and low-carbon technologies play important roles in reducing environmental risk and developing green tourism. An energy-saving and low-carbon technology scheme selection may often involve multiple criteria and sub-criteria as well as multiple stakeholders or decision makers, and thus can be structured as a hierarchical multi-criteria group decision making problem. This paper proposes a framework to solve group consensus decision making problems, where decision makers’ preferences between the alternatives considered with respective to each criterion are elicited by the paired comparison method, and expressed as triangular fuzzy preference relations (TFPRs). The paper first simplifies the existing computation formulas used to determine triangular fuzzy weights of TFPRs. A consistency index is then devised to measure the inconsistency degree of a TFPR and is used to check acceptable consistency of TFPRs. By introducing a possibility degree formula of comparing any two triangular fuzzy weights, an index is defined to measure the consensus level between an individual ranking order and the group ranking order for all alternatives. A consensus model is developed in detail for solving group decision making problems with TFPRs. A case study of selecting energy-saving and low-carbon technology schemes in star hotels is provided to illustrate how to apply the proposed group decision making consensus model in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Lu & Xuan Yang & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2018. "Fuzzy Group Consensus Decision Making and Its Use in Selecting Energy-Saving and Low-Carbon Technology Schemes in Star Hotels," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:9:p:2057-:d:170920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/9/2057/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/9/2057/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aguaron, Juan & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria, 2003. "The geometric consistency index: Approximated thresholds," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 137-145, May.
    2. Hui Lin & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Linguistic Multi-Attribute Group Decision Making with Risk Preferences and Its Use in Low-Carbon Tourism Destination Selection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-14, September.
    3. Dagoumas, [alpha].S. & Barker, T.S., 2010. "Pathways to a low-carbon economy for the UK with the macro-econometric E3MG model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3067-3077, June.
    4. Xiao Tan & Zaiwu Gong & Minji Huang & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Selecting Cooking Methods to Decrease Persistent Organic Pollutant Concentrations in Food of Animal Origin Using a Consensus Decision-Making Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Ian Bailey & Federico Caprotti, 2014. "The Green Economy: Functional Domains and Theoretical Directions of Enquiry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(8), pages 1797-1813, August.
    6. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Streimikiene, Dalia & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil M.D. & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2016. "Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy saving technologies and solutions in five star hotels: A new hierarchical framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 131-148.
    7. Grujić, Miodrag & Ivezić, Dejan & Živković, Marija, 2014. "Application of multi-criteria decision-making model for choice of the optimal solution for meeting heat demand in the centralized supply system in Belgrade," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 341-350.
    8. Çelikbilek, Yakup & Tüysüz, Fatih, 2016. "An integrated grey based multi-criteria decision making approach for the evaluation of renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1246-1258.
    9. Xiang Liu & Jia Liu, 2016. "Measurement of Low Carbon Economy Efficiency with a Three-Stage Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comparison of the Largest Twenty CO 2 Emitting Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, November.
    10. Xiayu Tong & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2016. "A Group Decision Framework with Intuitionistic Preference Relations and Its Application to Low Carbon Supplier Selection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhikun Ding & Menglian Zhu & Zezhou Wu & Yanbin Fu & Xia Liu, 2018. "Combining AHP-Entropy Approach with GIS for Construction Waste Landfill Selection—A Case Study of Shenzhen," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hui Lin & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Linguistic Multi-Attribute Group Decision Making with Risk Preferences and Its Use in Low-Carbon Tourism Destination Selection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Malkawi, Salaheddin & Al-Nimr, Moh'd & Azizi, Danah, 2017. "A multi-criteria optimization analysis for Jordan's energy mix," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 680-696.
    3. Bhowmik, Chiranjib & Bhowmik, Sumit & Ray, Amitava & Pandey, Krishna Murari, 2017. "Optimal green energy planning for sustainable development: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 796-813.
    4. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    5. Jun Liu & Xianbin Wu & Shouzhen Zeng & Tiejun Pan, 2017. "Intuitionistic Linguistic Multiple Attribute Decision-Making with Induced Aggregation Operator and Its Application to Low Carbon Supplier Selection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, November.
    6. Indre Siksnelyte & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Deepak Sharma, 2018. "An Overview of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Dealing with Sustainable Energy Development Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Zaiwu Gong & Lihong Wang, 2017. "On Consistency Test Method of Expert Opinion in Ecological Security Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, September.
    8. Aijun Liu & Qiuyun Zhu & Xiaohui Ji & Hui Lu & Sang-Bing Tsai, 2018. "Novel Method for Perceiving Key Requirements of Customer Collaboration Low-Carbon Product Design," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-32, July.
    9. Lihong Wang & Zaiwu Gong, 2017. "Priority of a Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relation with a Normal Distribution in Meteorological Disaster Risk Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    11. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    12. Mohamed Ali Elleuch & Marwa Mallek & Ahmed Frikha & Wafik Hachicha & Awad M. Aljuaid & Murad Andejany, 2021. "Solving a Multiple User Energy Source Selection Problem Using a Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-16, July.
    13. An-Jin Shie & You-Yu Dai & Ming-Xing Shen & Li Tian & Ming Yang & Wen-Wei Luo & Yenchun Jim Wu & Zhao-Hui Su, 2022. "Diamond Model of Green Commitment and Low-Carbon Travel Motivation, Constraint, and Intention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-21, July.
    14. repec:eco:journ2:2017-04-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    16. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    17. Winfried Osthorst, 2020. "Tensions in Urban Transitions. Conceptualizing Conflicts in Local Climate Policy Arrangements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Saeed Nosratabadi & Gergo Pinter & Amir Mosavi & Sandor Semperger, 2020. "Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models," Papers 2003.13423, arXiv.org.
    19. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Jalaladdin & Amiri, Maghsoud & Mostafaeipour, Ali & Le, Ttu, 2024. "Evaluation of renewable energy projects based on sustainability goals using a hybrid pythagorean fuzzy-based decision approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 297(C).
    20. Lundy, Michele & Siraj, Sajid & Greco, Salvatore, 2017. "The mathematical equivalence of the “spanning tree” and row geometric mean preference vectors and its implications for preference analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 197-208.
    21. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:9:p:2057-:d:170920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.