IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i22p4605-d1277830.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Green Supplier Selection Based on Sequential Group Three-Way Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Jiekun Song

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Xueli Leng

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Zhicheng Liu

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, China)

Abstract

Environmental protection and sustainable development have become the consensus of all countries in the world. Enterprises must pay attention to the impact on the environment in their operations. Therefore, the selection of green suppliers has become a crucial issue for companies. Supplier selection is a dynamic and complex multi-attribute group decision-making process. The decision results have the tripartite characteristics of “accepted”, “rejected” and “pending further investigation”, and experts need to constantly negotiate in the decision-making process to achieve consensus. In view of the above characteristics, this study constructs a sequential group three-way decision making (TWDM) method to support green supplier selection. Firstly, we review the existing literature on the evaluation criteria and selection methods of green suppliers. In this process, we construct an evaluation attribution system including the following four aspects: product formation, service level, development capability, and green level. Secondly, combining with the sequential and group characteristics of decision making, we propose a multiple-attribute sequential group TWDM method based on a multi-level granularity structure. The weight of each decision maker is determined by his influence weight and interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy entropy weight. The attribute weight is determined by entropy weight and subjective weight. By using the VIsekriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method improved by grey relation analysis (GRA), we calculate conditional probabilities. Since the cumulative prospect theory can reflect the risk attitude of decision makers, we apply it to calculate the decision thresholds. Finally, we apply a case of Q automobile manufacturer to verify the effectiveness, applicability and feasibility of the method. The innovation of this study is to construct social networks at each granularity level and introduce an expert information exchange model to promote group consensus. The sequential group TWDM method provides a new reference and idea for the selection of green suppliers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiekun Song & Xueli Leng & Zhicheng Liu, 2023. "Green Supplier Selection Based on Sequential Group Three-Way Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-33, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:22:p:4605-:d:1277830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/22/4605/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/22/4605/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Handfield, Robert & Walton, Steven V. & Sroufe, Robert & Melnyk, Steven A., 2002. "Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 70-87, August.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Imre Dobos & Gyöngyi Vörösmarty, 2021. "Green supplier selection using a common weights analysis of DEA and EOQ types of order allocation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 612-621, April.
    4. Awasthi, Anjali & Govindan, Kannan & Gold, Stefan, 2018. "Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 106-117.
    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. Wei Song & Zhiya Chen & Aijun Liu & Qiuyun Zhu & Wei Zhao & Sang-Bing Tsai & Hui Lu, 2018. "A Study on Green Supplier Selection in Dynamic Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Xi Bao & Fenfen Li, 2021. "A methodology for supplier selection under the curse of dimensionality problem based on fuzzy quality function deployment and interval data envelopment analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-20, July.
    3. Xiongyong Zhou & Zhiduan Xu, 2018. "An Integrated Sustainable Supplier Selection Approach Based on Hybrid Information Aggregation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-49, July.
    4. Ilyas Masudin & Isna Zahrotul Habibah & Rahmad Wisnu Wardana & Dian Palupi Restuputri & S. Sarifah Radiah Shariff, 2024. "Enhancing Supplier Selection for Sustainable Raw Materials: A Comprehensive Analysis Using Analytical Network Process (ANP) and TOPSIS Methods," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-23, July.
    5. Wu, Yunna & Ke, Yiming & Xu, Chuanbo & Li, Lingwenying, 2019. "An integrated decision-making model for sustainable photovoltaic module supplier selection based on combined weight and cumulative prospect theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 1235-1251.
    6. Jian-Peng Chang & Heng-Xin Ren & Luis Martínez & Witold Pedrycz & Zhen-Song Chen, 2024. "Requirement-driven supplier selection: a multi-criteria QFD-based approach under epistemic and stochastic uncertainties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(2), pages 1079-1128, November.
    7. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Wang, 2002. "Consistent testing for stochastic dominance: a subsampling approach," CeMMAP working papers 03/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    9. Heiko Karle & Georg Kirchsteiger & Martin Peitz, 2015. "Loss Aversion and Consumption Choice: Theory and Experimental Evidence," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 101-120, May.
    10. Shoji, Isao & Kanehiro, Sumei, 2016. "Disposition effect as a behavioral trading activity elicited by investors' different risk preferences," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    11. Muhammad Kashif & Thomas Leirvik, 2022. "The MAX Effect in an Oil Exporting Country: The Case of Norway," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, March.
    12. Jonathan Meng & Feng Fu, 2020. "Understanding Gambling Behavior and Risk Attitudes Using Cryptocurrency-based Casino Blockchain Data," Papers 2008.05653, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    13. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    14. Robert Gazzale & Julian Jamison & Alexander Karlan & Dean Karlan, 2013. "Ambiguous Solicitation: Ambiguous Prescription," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 1002-1011, January.
    15. Boone, Jan & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & van Ours, Jan C., 2009. "Experiments on unemployment benefit sanctions and job search behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 937-951, November.
    16. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    17. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Behavioral Biases and Nonadditive Dynamics in Risk Taking: An Experimental Investigation," Papers 1908.01709, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    18. Alptekin Ulutaş & Ayşe Topal & Dragan Pamučar & Željko Stević & Darjan Karabašević & Gabrijela Popović, 2022. "A New Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Sustainable Supplier Selection Based on a Novel Grey WISP and Grey BWM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    19. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    20. Breaban, Adriana & van de Kuilen, Gijs & Noussair, Charles, 2016. "Prudence, Personality, Cognitive Ability and Emotional State," Other publications TiSEM 9a01a5ab-e03d-49eb-9cd7-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    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:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:22:p:4605-:d:1277830. 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.