IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i12p4309-d372263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hazardous Waste Disposal Enterprise Selection in China Using Hesitant Fuzzy PROMETHEE

Author

Listed:
  • Xuedong Liang

    (The Economy and Enterprise Development Institute, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Jinrui Miao

    (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Yanjie Li

    (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Xu Yang

    (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Zhi Li

    (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

Abstract

Because of the urgent need to protect the environment, it has become vital to deal with the dangers and particularities associated with the growth in hazardous industrial waste. Governments have begun to expand their investments in the environmental protection industry and have tightened enterprise environmental management requirements. The 13th Five-Year Plan period in China, in particular, increased the focus on the environmental supervision and enterprise environmental management. Because of the specific qualities of many types of hazardous waste, most enterprises do not have the ability to process hazardous waste and therefore must outsource the disposal to third-party contractors. However, choosing suitable hazardous waste disposal enterprises (HWDE) can be difficult. Therefore, to assist in the selection of appropriate hazardous waste disposal enterprises, this paper developed a comprehensive evaluation index system for hazardous waste disposal enterprises (EISHWDE). As multi-criteria decision-making problems involve qualitative evaluations that have semantic ambiguity, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTS) were introduced to increase the accuracy of the evaluation process, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) used to determine the objective indicator weights, and PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation) employed to determine the final order for the selected enterprises. This research developed a scientific evaluation model that industrial waste enterprises (IWE) and related organizations could use to objectively and systematically select suitable hazardous waste disposal enterprises. Then, the problems of uncertainty and fuzzy semantics in the evaluation process were solved, and the weight of each selection criteria and the ranking of alternative enterprises are given.

Suggested Citation

  • Xuedong Liang & Jinrui Miao & Yanjie Li & Xu Yang & Zhi Li, 2020. "Hazardous Waste Disposal Enterprise Selection in China Using Hesitant Fuzzy PROMETHEE," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4309-:d:372263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4309/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4309/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Swift, Cathy Owens, 1995. "Preferences for single sourcing and supplier selection criteria," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 105-111, February.
    2. Mohd Nishat Faisal & Sheeba Khan & I.H. Farooqi, 2011. "Prioritising factors for selection of infectious waste management contractors using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Applied Management Science, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3), pages 275-293.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    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. Burak, Selmin & Samanlioglu, Funda & Ülker, Duygu, 2022. "Evaluation of irrigation methods in Söke Plain with HF-AHP-PROMETHEE II hybrid MCDM method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).

    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. Baskaran, Venkatesan & Nachiappan, Subramanian & Rahman, Shams, 2012. "Indian textile suppliers' sustainability evaluation using the grey approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 647-658.
    2. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    3. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    4. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    5. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    6. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    7. Yang, Hui & Chen, Jing & Chen, Xu & Chen, Bintong, 2017. "The impact of customer returns in a supply chain with a common retailer," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(1), pages 139-150.
    8. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    9. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    10. Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Srivastava, Praveen Ranjan & Eachempati, Prajwal & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2024. "Exploring the impact of key performance factors on energy markets: From energy risk management perspectives," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    11. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    12. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    13. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    14. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.
    15. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    16. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    17. Jha, Madan K. & Chowdary, V.M. & Kulkarni, Y. & Mal, B.C., 2014. "Rainwater harvesting planning using geospatial techniques and multicriteria decision analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 96-111.
    18. Om Prakash Mishra & Mahesh Chand & Krishan Kumar & Prashant Mishra, 2023. "Investigating applicability of green supply chain management in manufacturing sectors," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(4), pages 1183-1196, August.
    19. David Han-Min Wang & Quang Linh Huynh, 2013. "Mediating Role of Knowledge Management in Effect of Management Accounting Practices on Firm Performance," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(3), pages 1-10, June.
    20. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.

    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:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4309-:d:372263. 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.