IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v20y2018i3d10.1007_s10668-017-9936-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comprehensive benefit evaluation of eco-industrial parks by employing the best-worst method based on circular economy and sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Haoran Zhao

    (North China Electric Power University)

  • Sen Guo

    (North China Electric Power University)

  • Huiru Zhao

    (North China Electric Power University)

Abstract

At the aim of solving the increasing conflicts among the economic growth, resource shortage, and environmental aggravation, the eco-industrial park becomes a significant research issue to achieve sustainable development and circular economy. Therefore, evaluating the comprehensive benefit of eco-industrial parks and providing references and policy formulation in supporting the improvement of construction and management level for eco-industrial parks are of great significance. In this paper, a hybrid framework was proposed to assess the comprehensive benefit of eco-industrial parks in terms of circular economy and sustainability. Firstly, the evaluation index system was constructed by using grey-Delphi method, which included economic benefit criteria, social benefit criteria, and environmental benefit criteria with nine quantitative sub-criteria and four qualitative sub-criteria. Then, a new comparison-based method, namely the best-worst method, was employed to determine the weights of all sub-criteria and the performance values of all selected eco-industrial parks with respect to the qualitative sub-criteria. Finally, five selected representative eco-industrial parks in China were ranked in terms of comprehensive benefit, and the optimal eco-industrial park was selected. According to the results of comprehensive benefit evaluation for eco-industrial parks, the strengths and weaknesses of each eco-industrial park were obvious. At the end, the recommendations for the effective and rapid development of eco-industrial parks were formulated.

Suggested Citation

  • Haoran Zhao & Sen Guo & Huiru Zhao, 2018. "Comprehensive benefit evaluation of eco-industrial parks by employing the best-worst method based on circular economy and sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1229-1253, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:20:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-017-9936-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-017-9936-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-017-9936-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-017-9936-6?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. Tudor, Terry & Adam, Emma & Bates, Margaret, 2007. "Drivers and limitations for the successful development and functioning of EIPs (eco-industrial parks): A literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 199-207, March.
    2. Tian, Jinping & Shi, Han & Li, Xing & Chen, Lujun, 2012. "Measures and potentials of energy-saving in a Chinese fine chemical industrial park," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 459-470.
    3. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    4. Min-Ren Yan & Kuo-Ming Chien, 2013. "Evaluating the Economic Performance of High-Technology Industry and Energy Efficiency: A Case Study of Science Parks in Taiwan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, February.
    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. Gholamreza Haseli & Reza Sheikh & Jianqiang Wang & Hana Tomaskova & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2021. "A Novel Approach for Group Decision Making Based on the Best–Worst Method (G-BWM): Application to Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Mengtian Zhang & Huiling Wang, 2023. "Evolution of Industrial Ecology and Analysis of Influencing Factors: The Yellow River Basin in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, June.
    3. A. Kulakovskaya & C. Knoeri & F. Radke & N. U. Blum, 2023. "Measuring the Economic Impacts of a Circular Economy: an Evaluation of Indicators," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 657-692, June.
    4. Chun-Chieh Tseng & Jun-Yi Zeng & Min-Liang Hsieh & Chih-Hung Hsu, 2022. "Analysis of Innovation Drivers of New and Old Kinetic Energy Conversion Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Chinese Case," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(20), pages 1-25, October.
    5. Zeng, Douglas Zhihua & Cheng, Lei & Shi, Lei & Luetkenhorst, Wilfried, 2021. "China’s green transformation through eco-industrial parks," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    6. Valeria Ferreira Gregorio & Laia Pié & Antonio Terceño, 2018. "A Systematic Literature Review of Bio, Green and Circular Economy Trends in Publications in the Field of Economics and Business Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-39, November.
    7. Luthra, Sunil & Kumar, Anil & Sharma, Manu & Arturo Garza-Reyes, Jose & Kumar, Vikas, 2022. "An analysis of operational behavioural factors and circular economy practices in SMEs: An emerging economy perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 321-336.
    8. S. S. Ganji & A. N. Ahangar & Samaneh Jamshidi Bandari, 2022. "Evaluation of vehicular emissions reduction strategies using a novel hybrid method integrating BWM, Q methodology and ER approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 11576-11614, October.
    9. Roya Ghamari & Mohammad Mahdavi-Mazdeh & Seyed Farid Ghannadpour, 2022. "Resilient and sustainable supplier selection via a new framework: a case study from the steel industry," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 10403-10441, August.
    10. Sen Guo & Wenyue Zhang & Xiao Gao, 2020. "Business Risk Evaluation of Electricity Retail Company in China Using a Hybrid MCDM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, March.
    11. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    12. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Multi-attribute large-scale group decision making with data mining and subgroup leaders: An application to the development of the circular economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Nan Li & Haining Zhang & Xiangcheng Zhang & Xue Ma & Sen Guo, 2020. "How to Select the Optimal Electrochemical Energy Storage Planning Program? A Hybrid MCDM Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    14. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Alejandro Padilla-Rivera & Sara Russo-Garrido & Nicolas Merveille, 2020. "Addressing the Social Aspects of a Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Jurgita Kuizinaitė & Mangirdas Morkūnas & Artiom Volkov, 2023. "Assessment of the Most Appropriate Measures for Mitigation of Risks in the Agri-Food Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-18, June.
    17. Li, Dezhi & Du, Bingzhen & Zhu, Jin, 2021. "Evaluating old community renewal based on emergy analysis: A case study of Nanjing," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 449(C).
    18. Luca Fraccascia & Vahid Yazdanpanah & Guido Capelleveen & Devrim Murat Yazan, 2021. "Energy-based industrial symbiosis: a literature review for circular energy transition," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 4791-4825, April.
    19. 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.
    20. Qian, Long & Xu, Xiaolin & Sun, Ying & Zhou, Yunjie, 2022. "Carbon emission reduction effects of eco-industrial park policy in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).

    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. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Zarei, Esmaeil & Khan, Faisal & Abbassi, Rouzbeh, 2021. "Importance of human reliability in process operation: A critical analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    3. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Ramin Bazrafshan & Fatih Ecer & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2022. "The Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability Strategy Integrated with Bayesian BWM-MARCOS Methods to Determine the Optimal Lithium Battery Plant Located in South America," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Paul, Ananna & Shukla, Nagesh & Trianni, Andrea, 2023. "Modelling supply chain sustainability challenges in the food processing sector amid the COVID-19 outbreak," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    5. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    7. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    8. Željko Stević & Irena Đalić & Dragan Pamučar & Zdravko Nunić & Slavko Vesković & Marko Vasiljević & Ilija Tanackov, 2019. "A new hybrid model for quality assessment of scientific conferences based on Rough BWM and SERVQUAL," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 1-30, April.
    9. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Modeling personalized cognition of customers in online shopping," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    11. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    12. Kavitha, S. & Satheeshkumar, J. & Amudha, T., 2024. "Multi-label feature selection using q-rung orthopair hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach extended to CODAS," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 148-173.
    13. Junli Zhang & Guoteng Wang & Zheng Xu & Zheren Zhang, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Method and Strengthening Measures for AC/DC Hybrid Power Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    14. Hamzeh Soltanali & Mehdi Khojastehpour & Siamak Kheybari, 2023. "Evaluating the critical success factors for maintenance management in agro-industries using multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 949-968, June.
    15. Yossi Hadad & Baruch Keren & Dima Alberg, 2023. "An Expert System for Ranking and Matching Electric Vehicles to Customer Specifications and Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Robin Molinier & Pascal da Costa, 2019. "Infrastructure sharing synergies and industrial symbiosis: optimal capacity oversizing and pricing," Post-Print hal-01792032, HAL.
    17. Jen-Jen Yang & Yen-Ching Chuang & Huai-Wei Lo & Ting-I Lee, 2020. "A Two-Stage MCDM Model for Exploring the Influential Relationships of Sustainable Sports Tourism Criteria in Taichung City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-16, March.
    18. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    19. Faruk Dayi & Ali Cilesiz & Mustafa Yucel, 2024. "Strategic Management of Clean Energy Investments: Financial Performance Insights by Using BWM-based VIKOR and TOPSIS Methods," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 14(5), pages 566-574, September.
    20. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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:endesu:v:20:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-017-9936-6. 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.