IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i23p13483-d696293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Nutraceuticals Greener Applications: The Cynara cardunculus Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Michele Borroni

    (Consorzio Italbiotec, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Carlo Massimo Pozzi

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Sara Daniotti

    (Consorzio Italbiotec, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Fabiana Gatto

    (Consorzio Italbiotec, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Ilaria Re

    (Consorzio Italbiotec, 20126 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

Nutraceuticals are an ever-expanding market worldwide, facing the unstoppable transition towards a green economy. Developing economically feasible and sustainable alternatives to current raw materials for the extraction of nutraceuticals is, therefore, essential to reach these goals and, at the same time, achieve social and economic competitiveness. This paper intends to propose an economical and environmentally sustainable feedstock for chlorogenic acid (CGA) and inulin, whose current extraction from green coffee and chicory, respectively, is unsustainable. Our approach is based on the multi-criteria decision-making approach (MCDA), supported by the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), ranking the performance of competitor biomasses according to economic, social, and technological criteria. The results of this study highlight cardoon ( Cynara cardunculus ) as a promising raw material for the extraction of CGA and inulin in virtue of the high concentration, low-input growth regime, and the possibility of being grown on marginal lands. Nevertheless, cardoon biomass availability is currently scarce, extraction methods are underdeveloped, and consequently, the obtained product’s price is higher than the benchmark competitors. Policies and investments favoring sustainable cultivations could stimulate cardoon employment, linking economic advantages and land requalification while limiting phenomena such as desertification and food competition in the Mediterranean basin.

Suggested Citation

  • Michele Borroni & Carlo Massimo Pozzi & Sara Daniotti & Fabiana Gatto & Ilaria Re, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Nutraceuticals Greener Applications: The Cynara cardunculus Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13483-:d:696293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13483/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13483/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Shanshan & Kallas, Zein, 2021. "Meta-Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Food Products," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314970, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Elena Tamburini & Paola Pedrini & Maria Gabriella Marchetti & Elisa Anna Fano & Giuseppe Castaldelli, 2015. "Life Cycle Based Evaluation of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Agricultural Productions in the Mediterranean Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Jerome Vanclay & John Shortiss & Scott Aulsebrook & Angus Gillespie & Ben Howell & Rhoda Johanni & Michael Maher & Kelly Mitchell & Mark Stewart & Jim Yates, 2011. "Customer Response to Carbon Labelling of Groceries," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 153-160, March.
    4. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2008. "Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1074-1089, March.
    5. Fabiana Gatto & Sara Daniotti & Ilaria Re, 2021. "Driving Green Investments by Measuring Innovation Impacts. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Regional Bioeconomy Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-27, October.
    6. Ho, William, 2008. "Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 211-228, April.
    7. Lee, Hsing-Chen & Chang, Ching-Ter, 2018. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 883-896.
    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. Abdul, Daud & Wenqi, Jiang & Tanveer, Arsalan, 2022. "Prioritization of renewable energy source for electricity generation through AHP-VIKOR integrated methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1018-1032.
    2. 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.
    3. Milad Kolagar & Seyed Mohammad Hassan Hosseini & Ramin Felegari & Parviz Fattahi, 2020. "Policy-making for renewable energy sources in search of sustainable development: a hybrid DEA-FBWM approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 485-509, December.
    4. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    5. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    6. Li, Yan-Lai & Tang, Jia-Fu & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Jiang, Yu-Shi & Han, Yi & Pu, Yun, 2011. "Estimating the final priority ratings of engineering characteristics in mature-period product improvement by MDBA and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 575-586, June.
    7. Kara, Karahan & Yalçın, Galip Cihan & Akagün Ergin, Elif & Simic, Vladimir & Pamucar, Dragan, 2024. "A neutrosophic WENSLO-ARLON model for measuring sustainable brand equity performance," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Shraddha Yadav & Yingjiao Xu & Helmut Hergeth, 2024. "Walking the Talk: Unraveling the Influence of the Sustainability Features of Leather Alternatives on Consumer Behavior toward Running Shoes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Climate-Friendly Food in European Countries," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276930, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    11. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    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. Juan Cabello Eras & Dayli Covas Varela & Gilberto Hernández Pérez & Alexis Sagastume Gutiérrez & Dunia García Lorenzo & Carlo Vandecasteele & Luc Hens, 2014. "Comparative study of the urban quality of life in Cuban first-level cities from an objective dimension," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 195-215, February.
    14. Nock, Destenie & Baker, Erin, 2019. "Holistic multi-criteria decision analysis evaluation of sustainable electric generation portfolios: New England case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 655-673.
    15. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    16. Mohsen Jalalimajidi & S. M. Seyedhosseini, 2017. "Replacing Renewable Energy in Iranian Industries Using Optimal Models," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 109-112.
    17. Gómez-Calvet, Roberto & Conesa, David & Gómez-Calvet, Ana Rosa & Tortosa-Ausina, Emili, 2014. "Energy efficiency in the European Union: What can be learned from the joint application of directional distance functions and slacks-based measures?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 137-154.
    18. Meiran Zhiyenbayev & Nadezhda Kunicina & Madina Mansurova & Antons Patlins & Jelena Caiko & Vladimir Beliaev & Roberts Grants & Martins Bisenieks & Guldana Shyntore, 2024. "Development of Aggregated Sustainability Indicators for Quality of Life Evaluations in Urban Areas of the Republic of Kazakhstan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-30, October.
    19. Chiara Mazzocchi & Guido Sali, 2022. "Supporting mountain agriculture through “mountain product” label: a choice experiment approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 701-723, January.
    20. Jiri Hejkrlik & Johana Rondevaldova & Petra Chaloupkova, 2024. "Assessing Consumer Interest in Sustainable and Ethically Certified Tropical Fruits in the Central and Eastern European Region," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-28, November.

    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:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13483-:d:696293. 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.