IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2602-d336900.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Literature Review of the Concepts of Resilience and Sustainability in Group Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili

    (Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, Via Alfonso Valerio 6/1, 34127 Trieste, Italy)

  • Elio Padoano

    (Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, Via Alfonso Valerio 6/1, 34127 Trieste, Italy)

Abstract

The most critical decisions usually involve several decision makers with different roles and opportunities to commit key resources. Several group decision-making (GDM) approaches can support the identification of a joint or compromise decision in less conflicting settings, where there is a group of subjects (e.g’, partners) who pursue a common overall objective. However, considering the uncertainty in future events and complexity of modern-day systems, decision processes do not always produce beneficial results or give the participants a positive perception of their role in the process. Group decision-making should then take into consideration some aspects that might insure future resilience and sustainability, particularly the achievement of the objectives in view of future risks and the transparency and participation that are needed to limit problems in the implementation phase of the decision. The literature survey presented in this study identified a research gap regarding GDM. Differently from traditional GDM, which was first discussed in the early 1980s and whose body of knowledge is pretty defined, resilient and sustainable GDM (R&S GDM) is fairly new. The main objective of this study is then identifying the main attributes for supporting sustainable and resilient group decisions. To this aim, a preliminary focused systematic review was conducted to study the existing group decision-making methods in the literature and how the concepts of sustainability and resilience have been employed. After defining the search keywords and exclusion criteria for the individuation of the articles, the first screening process was carried out and the most relevant articles were selected. The last steps of the systematic review were the classification of the articles and the full paper examination to extract the main factors of R&S GDM. Seven attributes were listed as the key factors of R&S GDM. In light of those factors, a group decision process concerning an injection moulding line in Tajikistan was investigated. The case study highlighted that over self-confidence, information flow and transparency were the main reasons for faulty decisions, thus suggesting that information system and information fluidity play an important role in R&S GDM. Finally, the most important managerial implications of R&S GDM are reported.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano, 2020. "A Literature Review of the Concepts of Resilience and Sustainability in Group Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2602-:d:336900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2602/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2602/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramin Gharizadeh Beiragh & Reza Alizadeh & Saeid Shafiei Kaleibari & Fausto Cavallaro & Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Romualdas Bausys & Abbas Mardani, 2020. "An integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for Sustainability Performance Assessment for Insurance Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Gilat Levy, 2007. "Decision Making in Committees: Transparency, Reputation, and Voting Rules," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 150-168, March.
    3. Aliya Fahmi & Fazli Amin & Saleem Abdullah & Asad Ali, 2019. "Approaches to Multi-Attribute Group Decision-Making Based on Trapezoidal Linguistic Uncertain Cubic Fuzzy TOPSIS Method," New Mathematics and Natural Computation (NMNC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 261-282, July.
    4. V. Martins & Delta Silva & Pedro Cabral, 2012. "Social vulnerability assessment to seismic risk using multicriteria analysis: the case study of Vila Franca do Campo (São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(2), pages 385-404, June.
    5. C. Béné & Luc Doyen, 2018. "From Resistance to Transformation: A Generic Metric of Resilience Through Viability," Post-Print hal-03118040, HAL.
    6. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    7. Slavko Arsovski & Goran Putnik & Zora Arsovski & Danijela Tadic & Aleksandar Aleksic & Aleksandar Djordjevic & Slavisa Moljevic, 2015. "Modelling and Enhancement of Organizational Resilience Potential in Process Industry SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Ion Ursu & Dan Vamanu & Adrian Gheorghe & Ion I. Purica, 1985. "Socioeconomic Risk in Development of Energy Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 315-326, December.
    9. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Najmeh Rahmani, 2020. "Waste Reduction for Green Service Supply Chain—the Case Study of a Payment Service Provider in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, February.
    10. Monvika Phadoongsitthi & Nopadol Rompho & Chiaki Iwai & Mitsuru Morita, 2017. "Effects of national culture on group decision making: a comparative study between Thailand and other Asian countries," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 13(2), pages 110-133.
    11. Chunguang Bai & Simonov Kusi-Sarpong & Hadi Badri Ahmadi & Joseph Sarkis, 2019. "Social sustainable supplier evaluation and selection: a group decision-support approach," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(22), pages 7046-7067, November.
    12. S. Vijayakumar Bharathi, 2017. "Prioritizing and Ranking the Big Data Information Security Risk Spectrum," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 18(3), pages 183-201, September.
    13. Yumei Chen & Xiaoyi Zhao & Eliot Rich & Luis Felipe Luna-Reyes, 2018. "Decision Models and Group Decision Support Systems for Emergency Management and City Resilience," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global, vol. 7(2), pages 35-50, April.
    14. Angie Ruiz & Jose Guevara, 2020. "Sustainable Decision-Making in Road Development: Analysis of Road Preservation Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-25, January.
    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. Syamsari Syamsari & Muhammad Ramaditya & Irma Andriani & Ayu Puspitasari, 2022. "Selecting Priority Policy Strategies for Sustainability of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises in Takalar Regency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Fabio Zagonari, 2024. "Sustainable business models and conflict indices for sustainable decision‐making: An application to decommissioning versus reusing offshore gas platforms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 180-196, February.
    3. Gečienė Jolita, 2020. "The Resilience of Organizations in the Context of Regional Social Sustainability: Management Challenges under Uncertainty," Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, Sciendo, vol. 83(1), pages 37-55, June.
    4. Finger, Gustavo Strauch Wilin & Lima-Junior, Francisco Rodrigues, 2022. "A hesitant fuzzy linguistic QFD approach for formulating sustainable supplier development programs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    5. Francesca Pirlone & Ilenia Spadaro & Selena Candia, 2020. "More Resilient Cities to Face Higher Risks. The Case of Genoa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Dorel BADEA & Diana RANF & Marian COMAN, 2021. "Academic perspectives on the specific challenges of urban resilience management," Smart Cities International Conference (SCIC) Proceedings, Smart-EDU Hub, Faculty of Public Administration, National University of Political Studies & Public Administration, vol. 9, pages 71-78, November.

    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. Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay & Moumita Deb & Johannes Lohse & Rebecca McDonald, 2024. "The swing voter's curse revisited: Transparency's impact on committee voting," Discussion Papers 24-01, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    2. Ying Chen & Hülya Eraslan, 2020. "Learning while setting precedents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 1222-1252, December.
    3. Mattozzi, Andrea & Merlo, Antonio, 2008. "Political careers or career politicians?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3-4), pages 597-608, April.
    4. Stephen Hansen & Michael McMahon, 2016. "First Impressions Matter: Signalling as a Source of Policy Dynamics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(4), pages 1645-1672.
    5. Khadjavi, Menusch & Lange, Andreas & Nicklisch, Andreas, 2014. "The Social Value of Transparency and Accountability: Experimental Evidence from Asymmetric Public Good Games," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100512, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    6. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Antonella Longo & Antonio Ficarella, 2022. "The Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM) to Support Risk-Based Decisions in a Case-Study of Critical Infrastructure Digitization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    7. Arpan Kumar Kar & P. S. Varsha & Shivakami Rajan, 2023. "Unravelling the Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in Industrial Applications: A Review of Scientific and Grey Literature," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(4), pages 659-689, December.
    8. Emeric Henry & Charles Louis-Sidois, 2020. "Voting and Contributing When the Group Is Watching," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 246-276, August.
    9. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    10. Ashish Kumar Rathore & Santanu Das & P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan, 2018. "Social Media Data Inputs in Product Design: Case of a Smartphone," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 19(3), pages 255-272, September.
    11. Cloléry, Héloïse, 2023. "Legislators in the crossfire: Strategic non-voting and the effect of transparency," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Andrea Mattozzi & Antonio Merlo, 2007. "The Transparency of Politics and the Quality of Politicians," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 311-315, May.
    13. Christophe Béné & Alex Cornelius & Fanny Howland, 2018. "Bridging Humanitarian Responses and Long-Term Development through Transformative Changes—Some Initial Reflections from the World Bank’s Adaptive Social Protection Program in the Sahel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, May.
    14. Chen, Ying & Eraslan, Hulya, 2018. "Learning While Setting Precedents," Working Papers 18-001, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    15. Najafi, Mehdi & Zolfagharinia, Hossein, 2024. "A Multi-objective integrated approach to address sustainability in a meat supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    16. Alina Vysochyna & Natalia Stoyanets & Grzegorz Mentel & Tadeusz Olejarz, 2020. "Environmental Determinants of a Country’s Food Security in Short-Term and Long-Term Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    17. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene, 2022. "Sustainable Development of Road Transport in the EU: Multi-Criteria Analysis of Countries’ Achievements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-25, November.
    18. Reinstein, David & Hugh-Jones, David, 2010. "The Benefit of Anonymity in Public Goods Games," Economics Discussion Papers 2933, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    19. Rui Guo & Zhenyong Wu, 2023. "Social sustainable supply chain performance assessment using hybrid fuzzy-AHP–DEMATEL–VIKOR: a case study in manufacturing enterprises," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 12273-12301, November.
    20. Andrea Mattozzi & Marcos Y. Nakaguma, 2016. "Public versus Secret Voting in Committees," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_29, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2602-:d:336900. 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.