IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v35y2015i3d10.1007_s10669-015-9561-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review of methods for sustainability appraisals in ship acquisition

Author

Listed:
  • Dina Margrethe Aspen

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology)

  • Magnus Sparrevik

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology)

  • Annik Magerholm Fet

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

Ship acquisition requires simultaneous consideration of environmental, economic, technological and social performance of candidate design solutions. During the last few decades, multi-criteria decision-making tools have gained popularity as an approach to assisting decision makers when appraising ship design. However, applications are limited to a few methods mostly within the value function class. In this review, we explore the applicability of 12 multi-criteria decision-making methods for typical decision contexts in ship acquisition. Technical and practical method properties are defined before their operational value for evaluations in ship acquisition is assessed. Our results show that a wide range of methods currently not applied offer promising properties in these contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Dina Margrethe Aspen & Magnus Sparrevik & Annik Magerholm Fet, 2015. "Review of methods for sustainability appraisals in ship acquisition," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 323-333, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:35:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-015-9561-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-015-9561-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-015-9561-6
    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/s10669-015-9561-6?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. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    2. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, October.
    3. Roubens, Marc, 1982. "Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-55, May.
    4. Hinloopen, Edwin & Nijkamp, Peter & Rietveld, Piet, 1983. "Qualitative discrete multiple criteria choice models in regional planning," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 77-102, February.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty, 1987. "Risk—Its Priority and Probability: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 159-172, June.
    6. Theodor J Stewart, 2005. "Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 445-466, Springer.
    7. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    8. Evangelos-Pavlos Rousos & Byung S. Lee, 2012. "Multicriteria analysis in shipping investment evaluation," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 423-442, July.
    9. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    2. Z. A. Collier & J. H. Lambert & I. Linkov, 2015. "Editorial," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 315-316, 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. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    2. 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.
    3. Pinto, F.S. & Costa, A.S. & Figueira, J.R. & Marques, R.C., 2017. "The quality of service: An overall performance assessment for water utilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 115-125.
    4. Pohl, Erik & Geldermann, Jutta, 2024. "Selection of multi-criteria energy efficiency and emission abatement portfolios in container terminals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 316(1), pages 386-395.
    5. 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.
    6. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    7. Fatima‐Zohra Younsi & Salem Chakhar & Alessio Ishizaka & Djamila Hamdadou & Omar Boussaid, 2020. "A Dominance‐Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1323-1341, July.
    8. 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.
    9. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    10. 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.
    11. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    12. Arandarenko, Mihail & Corrente, Salvatore & Jandrić, Maja & Stamenković, Mladen, 2020. "Multiple criteria decision aiding as a prediction tool for migration potential of regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1154-1166.
    13. Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Roman Słowiński, 2017. "Handling imprecise evaluations in multiple criteria decision aiding and robust ordinal regression by n-point intervals," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 127-157, June.
    14. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    15. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    16. Angelis, Aris & Kanavos, Panos, 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 137-156.
    17. C Ram & G Montibeller & A Morton, 2011. "Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 817-829, May.
    18. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    19. Paweł Ziemba, 2022. "Energy Security Assessment Based on a New Dynamic Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Katerina Kabassi, 2021. "Comparing Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Evaluating Environmental Education Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.

    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:envsyd:v:35:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-015-9561-6. 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.