IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i4p291-d66441.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Emergency Response Solutions for Sustainable Community Development by Using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Approaches: IVDHF-TOPSIS and IVDHF-VIKOR

Author

Listed:
  • Junling Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China
    Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Gajanan G. Hegde

    (Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Jennifer Shang

    (Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Xiaowen Qi

    (Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
    College of Business Administration, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

Emergency management is vital in implementing sustainable community development, for which community planning must include emergency response solutions to potential natural and manmade hazards. To help maintain such solution repository, we investigate effective fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making (FMCGDM) approaches for the complex problems of evaluating alternative emergency response solutions, where weights for decision makers and criteria are unknown due to problem complexity. We employ interval-valued dual hesitant fuzzy (IVDHF) set to address decision hesitancy more effectively. Based on IVDHF assessments, we develop a deviation maximizing model to compute criteria weights and another compatibility maximizing model to calculate weights for decision makers. Then, two ideal-solution-based FMCGDM approaches are proposed: (i) by introducing a synthesized IVDHF group decision matrix into TOPSIS, we develop an IVDHF-TOPSIS approach for fuzzy group settings; (ii) when emphasizing both maximum group utility and minimum individual regret, we extend VIKOR to develop an IVDHF-VIKOR approach, where the derived decision makers’ weights are utilized to obtain group decision matrix and the determined criteria weights are integrated to reflect the relative importance of distances from the compromised ideal solution. Compared with aggregation-operators-based approach, IVDHF-TOPSIS and IVDHF-VIKOR can alleviate information loss and computational complexity. Numerical examples have validated the effectiveness of the proposed approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Junling Zhang & Gajanan G. Hegde & Jennifer Shang & Xiaowen Qi, 2016. "Evaluating Emergency Response Solutions for Sustainable Community Development by Using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Approaches: IVDHF-TOPSIS and IVDHF-VIKOR," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:291-:d:66441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/291/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/291/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    2. Yanbing Ju & Aihua Wang & Tianhui You, 2015. "Emergency alternative evaluation and selection based on ANP, DEMATEL, and TL-TOPSIS," 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. 75(2), pages 347-379, February.
    3. He, Zhengxia & Xu, Shichun & Shen, Wenxing & Long, Ruyin & Yang, He, 2016. "Overview of the development of the Chinese Jiangsu coastal wind-power industry cluster," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 59-71.
    4. Zeshui Xu, 2010. "A Deviation-Based Approach to Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 57-76, January.
    5. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    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. Xiaowen Qi & Junling Zhang & Changyong Liang, 2018. "Multiple Attributes Group Decision-Making Approaches Based on Interval-Valued Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Unbalanced Linguistic Set and Their Applications," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-22, April.
    2. Tuzkaya, Gülfem & Sennaroglu, Bahar & Kalender, Zeynep Tuğçe & Mutlu, Meltem, 2019. "Hospital service quality evaluation with IVIF-PROMETHEE and a case study," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Xiao-Wen Qi & Jun-Ling Zhang & Shu-Ping Zhao & Chang-Yong Liang, 2017. "Tackling Complex Emergency Response Solutions Evaluation Problems in Sustainable Development by Fuzzy Group Decision Making Approaches with Considering Decision Hesitancy and Prioritization among Asse," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-35, October.
    4. Huchang Liao & Guangsen Si & Zeshui Xu & Hamido Fujita, 2018. "Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Utility Set and Its Application in Selection of Fire Rescue Plans," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    2. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.
    3. Kuang-Hua Hu & Wei Jianguo & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2017. "Risk Factor Assessment Improvement for China’s Cloud Computing Auditing Using a New Hybrid MADM Model," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 737-777, May.
    4. Maghsoodi, Abtin Ijadi, 2023. "Cryptocurrency portfolio allocation using a novel hybrid and predictive big data decision support system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.
    6. Ioannis Sitaridis & Fotis Kitsios, 2020. "Competitiveness analysis and evaluation of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a multi-criteria approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 377-399, November.
    7. Sirirat Sae Lim & Hong Ngoc Nguyen & Chia-Li Lin, 2022. "Exploring the Development Strategies of Science Parks Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-29, April.
    8. Zeynep Gamze Mert & Gülşen Akman, 2011. "The Profile of the Organized Industrial Zones in Kocaeli/TURKEY," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1137, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Haji Vahabzadeh, Ali & Asiaei, Arash & Zailani, Suhaiza, 2015. "Reprint of “Green decision-making model in reverse logistics using FUZZY-VIKOR method”," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 104(PB), pages 334-347.
    10. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Huang, Xianjin & Fu, Guole & Chen, Jia-Tsong & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "Evaluating the sustainability of urban renewal projects based on a model of hybrid multiple-attribute decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    11. Saja Kosanović & Mirjana Miletić & Ljubo Marković, 2021. "Energy Refurbishment of Family Houses in Serbia in Line with the Principles of Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, May.
    12. Hsu, C.-H. & Wang, Fu-Kwun & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2012. "The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 95-111.
    13. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan & Kao, Ya-Ling & Kuo, Szu-Yu, 2023. "Exploring the critical factors influencing the outlying island talent recruitment and selection evaluation model: Empirical evidence from Penghu, Taiwan," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Arash Malekian & Ali Azarnivand, 2016. "Application of Integrated Shannon’s Entropy and VIKOR Techniques in Prioritization of Flood Risk in the Shemshak Watershed, Iran," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(1), pages 409-425, January.
    15. Audrius Čereška & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ina Tetsman & Irina Grinbergienė, 2016. "Sustainable Assessment of Aerosol Pollution Decrease Applying Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, June.
    16. Namık Kemal Erdoğan & Serpil Altınırmak & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2016. "Comparison of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) methods with respect to performance of food firms listed in BIST," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 5(1), pages 67-90.
    17. Lei Xiong & Cheng-Lein Teng & Bo-Wei Zhu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Shan-Lin Huang, 2017. "Using the D-DANP-mV Model to Explore the Continuous System Improvement Strategy for Sustainable Development of Creative Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-37, October.
    18. Fu, Xin & Qiang, Yongjie & Liu, Xuxu & Jiang, Ying & Cui, Zhiwei & Zhang, Deyu & Wang, Jianwei, 2022. "Will multi-industry supply chains' resilience under the impact of COVID-19 pandemic be different? A perspective from China's highway freight transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 165-178.
    19. 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.
    20. Kai Wang & Zhe Wang & Jun Deng & Yuanyuan Feng & Quanfang Li, 2022. "Study on the Evaluation of Emergency Management Capacity of Resilient Communities by the AHP-TOPSIS Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, December.

    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:8:y:2016:i:4:p:291-:d:66441. 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.