IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v206y2013i1p39-5810.1007-s10479-013-1314-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-objective seaport planning by MOORA decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Willem Brauers

Abstract

An approach is needed to localize in an optimal way a seaport facing different indicators, criteria or objectives sometimes from different groups or individuals. The internal mechanical solution of a Ratio System, producing dimensionless numbers, is preferred to Cost-Benefit or to Weights which most of the time are used to equalize the different units. The ratio system creates the opportunity to use a second approach: a non-subjective Reference Point Theory based on the found ratios. The two approaches form a control on each other. This theory is called MOORA (Multi-Objective Optimization by Ratio Analysis). As an application a ranking is made for the best location of a new seaport or for the expansion of an existing one given a set of objectives to be fulfilled. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Willem Brauers, 2013. "Multi-objective seaport planning by MOORA decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 39-58, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:206:y:2013:i:1:p:39-58:10.1007/s10479-013-1314-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-013-1314-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-013-1314-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-013-1314-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1974. "General Economic Equilibrium: Purpose, Analytic Techniques, Collective Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(3), pages 253-272, June.
    2. Willem K. Brauers, 2002. "The multiplicative representation for multiple objectives optimization with an application for arms procurement," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(4), pages 327-340, June.
    3. Pablo Coto-Millán & Miguel Angel Pesquera & Juan Castanedo (ed.), 2010. "Essays on Port Economics," Contributions to Economics, Springer, number 978-3-7908-2425-4, December.
    4. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1984. "Prométhée: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9305, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. C. West Churchman & Russell L. Ackoff, 1954. "An Approximate Measure of Value," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 172-187, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    9. Willem K. Brauers, 2004. "Multiobjective optimization (moo) in privatization," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 59-65, February.
    10. Willem K. Brauers, 2004. "Multi‐objective optimization for facilities management," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 173-182, November.
    11. Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer, 1963. "An Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 458-467, 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. Sergey G. Belyaev & Nikolay I. Dorogov & Ivan A. Kapitonov & Ivan A. Kapitonov & Svetlana N. Asabina, 2020. "Ensuring competition in the context of globalization of maritime transport services," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(3), pages 1597-1611, March.
    2. Leonardo Ensslin & Vinicius Dezem & Ademar Dutra & Sandra Rolim Ensslin & Karine Somensi, 2018. "Seaport-performance tools: an analysis of the international literature," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 20(4), pages 587-602, December.
    3. Srivastava, Akanksha & Parmar, Dipteek & Pamucar, Dragan, 2023. "Comparing multi-criteria models for ranking the Performance of India's water supply utilities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    4. Gülçin Canbulut & Erkan Köse & Oğuzhan Ahmet Arik, 2022. "Public transportation vehicle selection by the grey relational analysis method," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 367-384, June.
    5. Willem K. M. Brauers, 2018. "Location Theory and Multi-Criteria Decision Making: An Application of the MOORA Method," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 12(3), September.

    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. Willem Karel M. Brauers & Romualdas Ginevičius, 2009. "Robustness in regional development studies. The case of Lithuania," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 121-140, February.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    3. Irina Vinogradova, 2019. "Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    5. Claudia Margarita Acuña-Soto & Vicente Liern & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2020. "Multiple criteria performance evaluation of YouTube mathematical educational videos by IS-TOPSIS," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2017-2039, December.
    6. Gaffeo Edoardo & Gobbi Lucio, 2021. "Achieving financial stability during a liquidity crisis: a multi-objective approach," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 48-74, June.
    7. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    12. Zohre Hoseinzade & Asal Zavarei & Kourosh Shirani, 2021. "Application of prediction–area plot in the assessment of MCDM methods through VIKOR, PROMETHEE II, and permutation," 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. 109(3), pages 2489-2507, December.
    13. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    15. Priscila Celebrini de Oliveira Campos & Tainá da Silva Rocha Paz & Letícia Lenz & Yangzi Qiu & Camila Nascimento Alves & Ana Paula Roem Simoni & José Carlos Cesar Amorim & Gilson Brito Alves Lima & Ma, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision Method for Sustainable Watercourse Management in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-22, August.
    16. Agata Sielska, 2010. "Multicriteria rankings of open-end investment funds and their stability," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 20(1), pages 111-129.
    17. Wolters, W. T. M. & Mareschal, B., 1995. "Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 281-290, March.
    18. Irene Josa & Albert de la Fuente & Maria del Mar Casanovas-Rubio & Jaume Armengou & Antonio Aguado, 2021. "Sustainability-Oriented Model to Decide on Concrete Pipeline Reinforcement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-25, March.
    19. Mehdi KESHAVARZ GHORABAEE & Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS & Zenonas TURSKIS & Jurgita ANTUCHEVICIENE, 2016. "A New Combinative Distance-Based Assessment(Codas) Method For Multi-Criteria Decision-Making," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 50(3), pages 25-44.
    20. Ting Kuo & Ming-Hui Chen, 2022. "On Indeterminacy of Interval Multiplicative Pairwise Comparison Matrix," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, February.

    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:spr:annopr:v:206:y:2013:i:1:p:39-58:10.1007/s10479-013-1314-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.