IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i1p410-d1312251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Framework for Assessing Hydrochars from Hydrothermal Carbonisation of Agrowaste with the Use of MCDA: Application with the Hierarchical SMAA-PROMETHEE Method

Author

Listed:
  • Panagiotis Isigonis

    (Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100 Mytilene, Greece
    Department of Environmental Research and Innovation, Luxembourg Institute of Science & Technology, 41, rue du Brill, L-4422 Belvaux, Luxembourg)

  • Salvatore Corrente

    (Department of Economics and Business, University of Catania, Corso Italia, 55, 95129 Catania, Italy)

  • Stergios Vakalis

    (Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100 Mytilene, Greece)

Abstract

Large amounts of hydrochar have been produced during the last decade by various hydrothermal carbonisation (HTC) processes. While the products of HTC seem to have widespread acceptance as valuable and efficient materials with advantages in their energy and environmental applications, which include soil improvement, heavy metal recovery, and many more, a comprehensive framework for the assessment of the different hydrochars based on their characteristics is missing. In this study, a framework for the assessment of hydrochars is proposed with the utilisation of Multi-Criteria Decision-Aiding (MCDA) methodologies. A hierarchical structure of independent criteria is established on a comprehensive level including three lines of evidence (LoE), i.e., Environmental, Economic, and Social LoE, which further include the assessment criteria. Hierarchical-SMAA-PROMETHEE is proposed as the most suitable MCDA methodology to be applied for assessing hydrochars based on the proposed framework. A case study is performed to demonstrate the utility of the framework and the advantages it offers to analysts and decision-makers. Hierarchical-SMAA-PROMETHEE is a non-compensatory method that enables exploring the decision problem on more than one level (comprehensive vs. LoE) and includes robust recommendations on the preference model and the elicitation of weights.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagiotis Isigonis & Salvatore Corrente & Stergios Vakalis, 2024. "A Framework for Assessing Hydrochars from Hydrothermal Carbonisation of Agrowaste with the Use of MCDA: Application with the Hierarchical SMAA-PROMETHEE Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:1:p:410-:d:1312251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/1/410/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/1/410/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    2. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2018. "GAIA-SMAA-PROMETHEE for a hierarchy of interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(2), pages 606-624.
    3. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    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. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    2. Marta Bottero & Chiara D’Alpaos & Alessandra Oppio, 2019. "Ranking of Adaptive Reuse Strategies for Abandoned Industrial Heritage in Vulnerable Contexts: A Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Silvia Angilella & Maria Rosaria Pappalardo, 2021. "Assessment of a failure prediction model in the energy sector: a multicriteria discrimination approach with Promethee based classification," Papers 2102.07656, arXiv.org.
    4. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    5. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2019. "The Ordinal Input for Cardinal Output Approach of Non-compensatory Composite Indicators: The PROMETHEE Scoring Method," MPRA Paper 95816, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2021. "The ordinal input for cardinal output approach of non-compensatory composite indicators: the PROMETHEE scoring method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 225-246.
    7. Chrysovalantis Gaganis & Panagiota Papadimitri & Menelaos Tasiou, 2021. "A multicriteria decision support tool for modelling bank credit ratings," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 306(1), pages 27-56, November.
    8. Puneet Agarwal & Kyle Hunt & Jun Zhuang & Bijan Sarkar & Amitrajit Sarkar & Ramesh Sharma, 2021. "An exploratory analysis for performance assessment of state police forces in india: an eclectic approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 1125-1151, June.
    9. Khannoussi, Arwa & Meyer, Patrick & Chaubet, Aurore, 2023. "A multi-criteria decision aiding approach for upgrading public sewerage systems and its application to the city of Brest," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    10. Junyi Chai & Zhiquan Weng & Wenbin Liu, 2021. "Behavioral Decision Making in Normative and Descriptive Views: A Critical Review of Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    11. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2020. "Maximum likelihood solutions for multicriterial choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 299-308.
    13. Almoghathawi, Yasser & Barker, Kash & Rocco, Claudio M. & Nicholson, Charles D., 2017. "A multi-criteria decision analysis approach for importance identification and ranking of network components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 142-151.
    14. Ricardo, Alexandre & Figueira, José Rui & Tavares, Luís Valadares, 2024. "Integrating confidence and preservation of information in the preference elicitation process: A lexicographic order approach for inconsistent judgments," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Martina Kuncova & Jana Seknickova, 2022. "Two-stage weighted PROMETHEE II with results’ visualization," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 30(2), pages 547-571, June.
    16. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    17. Martínez, Ricardo & Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquín & Llorca, Natividad, 2022. "Assessments in public procurement procedures," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Scholz, Michael & Pfeiffer, Jella & Rothlauf, Franz, 2017. "Using PageRank for non-personalized default rankings in dynamic markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 388-401.
    19. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    20. Dyckhoff, Harald & Souren, Rainer, 2022. "Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis and production theory for performance evaluation: Framework and review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 795-816.

    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:16:y:2024:i:1:p:410-:d:1312251. 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.