IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v17y2024i11p498-d1515492.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Double Optimum New Solution Method Based on EVA and Knapsack

Author

Listed:
  • Theofanis Petropoulos

    (Department of Economic & Regional Development, Panteion University, Syngrou Av. 136 176-71, 48100 Athens, Greece)

  • Paris Patsis

    (Department of Economic & Regional Development, Panteion University, Syngrou Av. 136 176-71, 48100 Athens, Greece)

  • Konstantinos Liapis

    (Department of Economic & Regional Development, Panteion University, Syngrou Av. 136 176-71, 48100 Athens, Greece)

  • Evangelos Chytis

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Ioannina, Campus Preveza, 48100 Preveza, Greece)

Abstract

Optimizing resource allocation often requires a trade-off between multiple objectives. Since projects must be fully implemented or not at all, this issue is modeled as an integer programming problem, precisely a knapsack-type problem, where decision variables are binary (1 or 0). Projects may be complementary/supplementary and competitive/conflicting, meaning some are prerequisites for others, while some prevent others from being implemented. In this paper, a two-objective optimization model in the energy sector is developed, and the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm III (NSGA III) is adopted to solve it because the NSGA-III method is capable of handling problems with non-linear characteristics as well as having multiple objectives. The objective is to maximize the overall portfolio’s EVA (Economic Value Added). EVA is different from traditional performance measures and is more appropriate because it incorporates the objectives of all stakeholders in a business. Furthermore, because each project generates different kilowatts, maximizing the total production of the portfolio is appropriate. Data from the Greek energy market show optimal solutions on the Pareto efficiency front ranging from (14.7%, 38,000) to (11.91%, 40,750). This paper offers a transparent resource allocation process for similar issues in other sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Theofanis Petropoulos & Paris Patsis & Konstantinos Liapis & Evangelos Chytis, 2024. "A Double Optimum New Solution Method Based on EVA and Knapsack," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-22, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:11:p:498-:d:1515492
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/11/498/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/17/11/498/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mavrotas, George & Florios, Kostas, 2013. "An improved version of the augmented epsilon-constraint method (AUGMECON2) for finding the exact Pareto set in Multi-Objective Integer Programming problems," MPRA Paper 105034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Thiemo Krink & Sandra Paterlini, 2011. "Multiobjective optimization using differential evolution for real-world portfolio optimization," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 157-179, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Forouli, Aikaterini & Gkonis, Nikolaos & Nikas, Alexandros & Siskos, Eleftherios & Doukas, Haris & Tourkolias, Christos, 2019. "Energy efficiency promotion in Greece in light of risk: Evaluating policies as portfolio assets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 818-831.
    2. Panos Xidonas & Haris Doukas & George Mavrotas & Olena Pechak, 2016. "Environmental corporate responsibility for investments evaluation: an alternative multi-objective programming model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 395-413, December.
    3. Bilel JARRAYA, 2013. "Asset Allocation And Portfolio Optimization Problems With Metaheuristics: A Literature Survey," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 3(4), pages 38-56, December.
    4. Satya Tamby & Daniel Vanderpooten, 2021. "Enumeration of the Nondominated Set of Multiobjective Discrete Optimization Problems," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 72-85, January.
    5. H. Khorshidian & M. Akbarpour Shirazi & S. M. T. Fatemi Ghomi, 2019. "An intelligent truck scheduling and transportation planning optimization model for product portfolio in a cross-dock," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 163-184, January.
    6. Schmidt, Adam & Albert, Laura A. & Zheng, Kaiyue, 2021. "Risk management for cyber-infrastructure protection: A bi-objective integer programming approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Erfan Hassannayebi & Seyed Hessameddin Zegordi & Mohammad Reza Amin-Naseri & Masoud Yaghini, 2017. "Train timetabling at rapid rail transit lines: a robust multi-objective stochastic programming approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 435-477, July.
    8. Petrelli, Marina & Fioriti, Davide & Berizzi, Alberto & Bovo, Cristian & Poli, Davide, 2021. "A novel multi-objective method with online Pareto pruning for multi-year optimization of rural microgrids," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    9. Mavrotas, George & Figueira, José Rui & Siskos, Eleftherios, 2015. "Robustness analysis methodology for multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems and application to project selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 142-155.
    10. Finke, Jonas & Bertsch, Valentin, 2022. "Implementing a highly adaptable method for the multi-objective optimisation of energy systems," MPRA Paper 115504, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Sahar Moazzeni & Sobhan Mostafayi Darmian & Lars Magnus Hvattum, 2023. "Multiple criteria decision making and robust optimization to design a development plan for small and medium-sized enterprises in the east of Iran," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-32, March.
    12. Zhang, Chuntian & Gao, Yuan & Yang, Lixing & Gao, Ziyou & Qi, Jianguo, 2020. "Joint optimization of train scheduling and maintenance planning in a railway network: A heuristic algorithm using Lagrangian relaxation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 64-92.
    13. S. Razavyan, 2016. "A Method for Generating a Well-Distributed Pareto Set in Multiple Objective Mixed Integer Linear Programs Based on the Decision Maker’s Initial Aspiration Level," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(04), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Zhong, Jia & Yu, T. Edward & Clark, Christopher D. & English, Burton C. & Larson, James A. & Cheng, Chu-Lin, 2018. "Effect of land use change for bioenergy production on feedstock cost and water quality," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 580-590.
    15. Farajiamiri, Mina & Meyer, Jörn-Christian & Walther, Grit, 2023. "Multi-objective optimization of renewable fuel supply chains regarding cost, land use, and water use," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).
    16. Majid Askarifard & Hamidreza Abbasianjahromi & Mehran Sepehri & Ehsanollah Zeighami, 2021. "A robust multi-objective optimization model for project scheduling considering risk and sustainable development criteria," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11494-11524, August.
    17. Mavrotas, George & Gakis, Nikos & Skoulaxinou, Sotiria & Katsouros, Vassilis & Georgopoulou, Elena, 2015. "Municipal solid waste management and energy production: Consideration of external cost through multi-objective optimization and its effect on waste-to-energy solutions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1205-1222.
    18. Wendy Wijaya & Kuntjoro Adji Sidarto, 2023. "Large-Scale Portfolio Optimization Using Biogeography-Based Optimization," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, October.
    19. N. A. Arellano-Arriaga & J. Molina & S. E. Schaeffer & A. M. Álvarez-Socarrás & I. A. Martínez-Salazar, 2019. "A bi-objective study of the minimum latency problem," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 431-454, June.
    20. Seyyed Amir Babak Rasmi & Ali Fattahi & Metin Türkay, 2021. "SASS: slicing with adaptive steps search method for finding the non-dominated points of tri-objective mixed-integer linear programming problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 841-876, January.

    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:jjrfmx:v:17:y:2024:i:11:p:498-:d:1515492. 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.