IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v52y2008i7p979-991.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of analytical hierarchy process to analyze stakeholders preferences for municipal solid waste management plans, Boston, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Contreras, Francisco
  • Hanaki, Keisuke
  • Aramaki, Toshiya
  • Connors, Stephen

Abstract

This paper presents analytical hierarchical process (AHP) in combination with life cycle assessment (LCA) as a decision support tool for municipal solid waste (MSW) management. A proposed set of treatment plans and an array of impacts create a complex decision environment for MSW management in the city of Boston. AHP is utilized to incorporate the relative importance of the different impact categories and treatment plans into the decision scheme regarding stakeholder group's preferences. The use of biogasification and refuse derived fuel (RDF) technologies into different management plans is presented as an alternative to the actual management of household solid waste. The results of the AHP application show that between the impact categories presented, green house gas emissions and landfill capacity constrains are ranked higher rather than the cost associated to the operation of the plan and health damage associated to the treatment plans presented among the stakeholder groups. In a broader context, the use of a hierarchical approach on AHP to structure the decision problem allows the development of four different scenarios according to the contribution of each stakeholder group to the decision scheme. In this analysis, the use of biogasification was considered as the most suitable plan to follow.

Suggested Citation

  • Contreras, Francisco & Hanaki, Keisuke & Aramaki, Toshiya & Connors, Stephen, 2008. "Application of analytical hierarchy process to analyze stakeholders preferences for municipal solid waste management plans, Boston, USA," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 979-991.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:52:y:2008:i:7:p:979-991
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.03.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344908000372
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.03.003?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. Russell, Clifford & Dale, Virginia & Lee, Junsoo & Jensen, Molly Hadley & Kane, Michael & Gregory, Robin, 2001. "Experimenting with multi-attribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 87-108, January.
    2. Joaquin Pérez, 1995. "Some Comments on Saaty's AHP," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(6), pages 1091-1095, June.
    3. Christer Carlsson & Pirkko Walden, 1995. "AHP in Political Group Decisions: A Study in the Art of Possibilities," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 14-29, August.
    4. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    5. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada & Munda, Giuseppe, 2000. "Alternative models of individual behaviour and implications for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 43-61, January.
    6. Azis, Iwan J., 1990. "Analytic Hierarchy Process in the benefit-cost framework: A post-evaluation of the Trans-Sumatra highway project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 38-48, September.
    7. Soma, Katrine, 2003. "How to involve stakeholders in fisheries management--a country case study in Trinidad and Tobago," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 47-58, January.
    8. 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.
    9. Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1997. "Choosing a solid waste management system using multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 19-36, April.
    10. Duke, Joshua M. & Aull-Hyde, Rhonda, 2002. "Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 131-145, August.
    11. Lai, Vincent S. & Wong, Bo K. & Cheung, Waiman, 2002. "Group decision making in a multiple criteria environment: A case using the AHP in software selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 134-144, February.
    12. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    13. Woolridge, Anne & Morrissey, Anne & Phillips, Paul S., 2005. "The development of strategic and tactical tools, using systems analysis, for waste management in large complex organisations: a case study in UK healthcare waste," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 115-137.
    14. Robin S. Gregory, 2000. "Valuing Environmental Policy Options: A Case Study Comparison of Multiattribute and Contingent Valuation Survey Methods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 151-173.
    15. Miettinen, Pauli & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 1997. "How to benefit from decision analysis in environmental life cycle assessment (LCA)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 279-294, October.
    16. Judith Petts, 2000. "Municipal Waste Management: Inequities and the Role of Deliberation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(6), pages 821-832, December.
    17. Roy, Bernard & Vincke, Philippe, 1981. "Multicriteria analysis: survey and new directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 207-218, November.
    18. Sarkis, Joseph, 2000. "A comparative analysis of DEA as a discrete alternative multiple criteria decision tool," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 543-557, June.
    19. Belton, Valerie & Gear, Tony, 1983. "On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 228-230.
    20. 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.
    21. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    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. Corrado lo Storto, 2021. "Eco-Productivity Analysis of the Municipal Solid Waste Service in the Apulia Region from 2010 to 2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Caferra, Rocco & D'Adamo, Idiano & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2023. "Wasting energy or energizing waste? The public acceptance of waste-to-energy technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    3. Phuong Giang Le & Hung Anh Le & Xuan Thang Dinh & Kieu Lan Phuong Nguyen, 2023. "Development of Sustainability Assessment Criteria in Selection of Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Technology in Developing Countries: A Case of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Pires, Ana & Chang, Ni-Bin & Martinho, Graça, 2011. "An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setúbal Peninsula, Portugal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 7-21.
    5. Phyllis Rumbidzai Kwenda & Gareth Lagerwall & Sibel Eker & Bas van Ruijven, 2022. "Identifying the Leverage Points in the Household Solid Waste Management System for Harare, Zimbabwe, Using Network Analysis Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Abba, Ahmad Halilu & Noor, Zainura Zainon & Yusuf, Rafiu O. & Din, Mohd Fadhil M.D. & Hassan, Mohd Ariffin Abu, 2013. "Assessing environmental impacts of municipal solid waste of Johor by analytical hierarchy process," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 188-196.
    7. Wenna Wang & Zhujie Chu & Tianyue Zhang, 2022. "Synergy Degree Evaluation of Stakeholder Engagement in Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management: A Case Study in Harbin, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Antonopoulos, I.-S. & Perkoulidis, G. & Logothetis, D. & Karkanias, C., 2014. "Ranking municipal solid waste treatment alternatives considering sustainability criteria using the analytical hierarchical process tool," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 149-159.
    9. Neshat, Aminreza & Pradhan, Biswajeet & Dadras, Mohsen, 2014. "Groundwater vulnerability assessment using an improved DRASTIC method in GIS," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 74-86.
    10. Doorga, Jay R.S. & Hall, Jim W. & Eyre, Nick, 2022. "Geospatial multi-criteria analysis for identifying optimum wind and solar sites in Africa: Towards effective power sector decarbonization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. Lai, Kee-Hung & Lun, Venus Y.H. & Wong, Christina W.Y. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2011. "Green shipping practices in the shipping industry: Conceptualization, adoption, and implications," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 631-638.
    12. Rybaczewska-Błażejowska Magdalena & Mazurek Damian & Mazur Marcin, 2022. "Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Decentralised Composting of Bio-Waste: A Case Study of The Łódź Agglomeration (Poland)," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 41(4), pages 89-105, December.
    13. Pazhuparambil Jayarajan Sajil Kumar & Lakshmanan Elango & Michael Schneider, 2022. "GIS and AHP Based Groundwater Potential Zones Delineation in Chennai River Basin (CRB), India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Achillas, Ch. & Vlachokostas, Ch. & Moussiopoulos, N. & Banias, G. & Kafetzopoulos, G. & Karagiannidis, A., 2011. "Social acceptance for the development of a waste-to-energy plant in an urban area," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(9), pages 857-863.
    15. Torkayesh, Ali Ebadi & Rajaeifar, Mohammad Ali & Rostom, Madona & Malmir, Behnam & Yazdani, Morteza & Suh, Sangwon & Heidrich, Oliver, 2022. "Integrating life cycle assessment and multi criteria decision making for sustainable waste management: Key issues and recommendations for future studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    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. Mesa, Pascual & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Berbel, Julio, 2008. "Análisis multicriterio de preferencias sociales en gestión hídrica bajo la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(02), pages 1-22.
    2. 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.
    3. Bolloju, N., 2001. "Aggregation of analytic hierarchy process models based on similarities in decision makers' preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 499-508, February.
    4. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    5. Prof. Dr. Sangita Bharuka & Nancy Shrivastava, 2020. "Review of Waste Management Models and Their Application," Journal of Commerce and Trade, Society for Advanced Management Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 38-48, April.
    6. Erdogmus, Senol & Aras, Haydar & Koç, Eylem, 2006. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for residential heating in Turkey using analytic network process (ANP) with group decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 269-279, June.
    7. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    8. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    9. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 257-269.
    10. Ruiz-Villaverde, Alberto & Picazo-Tadeo, Andrés J. & González-Gómez, Francisco, 2015. "The ‘social choice’ of privatising urban water services: A case study of Madrid in Spain," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 616-629.
    11. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    12. Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 559-581.
    13. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    14. Woolridge, Anne & Morrissey, Anne & Phillips, Paul S., 2005. "The development of strategic and tactical tools, using systems analysis, for waste management in large complex organisations: a case study in UK healthcare waste," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 115-137.
    15. Natalie M. Scala & Jayant Rajgopal & Luis G. Vargas & Kim LaScola Needy, 2016. "Group Decision Making with Dispersion in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 355-372, March.
    16. Altuzarra, Alfredo & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria & Salvador, Manuel, 2007. "A Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 367-382, October.
    17. Petra Grošelj & Špela Pezdevšek Malovrh & Lidija Zadnik Stirn, 2011. "Methods based on data envelopment analysis for deriving group priorities in analytic hierarchy process," 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. 19(3), pages 267-284, September.
    18. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2009. "A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2535-2548, August.
    19. José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador & Pilar Gargallo & Alfredo Altuzarra, 2016. "Systemic decision making in AHP: a Bayesian approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 261-284, October.
    20. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.

    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:eee:recore:v:52:y:2008:i:7:p:979-991. 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: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    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.