IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i20p8314-d425554.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Application of Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in Sustainable Project Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Rakan Alyamani

    (Department of Engineering Management & Systems Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409, USA)

  • Suzanna Long

    (Department of Engineering Management & Systems Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409, USA)

Abstract

The project selection process is a crucial step in sustainable development. Effective sustainable development depends on the ability to select the appropriate sustainable project to implement to ensure that the desired goals are met. Some of the most common characteristics or criteria used in evaluating sustainable projects include novelty, uncertainty, skill and experience, technology information transfer, and project cost. Prioritizing these criteria based on relative importance helps project managers and decision makers identify elements that require additional attention, better allocate resources, as well as improve the selection process when evaluating different sustainable project alternatives. The aim of this research is to use the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) methodology in which fuzzy numbers are utilized to realistically represent human judgment to rank the different project criteria based on relative importance and impact on sustainable projects. The results from the FAHP show that the most important criterion to consider in sustainable project selection is project cost, followed by novelty and uncertainty as the second and third most important criteria, respectively. The two least important criteria out of the total of five examined in this research were the skill and experience and technology information transfer, respectively. These results will help project managers and decision makers identify selection criteria with higher weights of importance. Given that the selection criteria chosen for this research are not limited to the evaluation of a specific type of sustainable projects or a specific location, they can be used to evaluate different types of sustainable projects in different environments and locations.

Suggested Citation

  • Rakan Alyamani & Suzanna Long, 2020. "The Application of Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in Sustainable Project Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8314-:d:425554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8314/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8314/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Hsing Hung & Kang, He-Yau & Lee, Amy H.I., 2010. "Strategic selection of suitable projects for hybrid solar-wind power generation systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 413-421, January.
    2. Seddiki, Mohammed & Bennadji, Amar, 2019. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for electricity generation in a residential building," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 101-117.
    3. Lin Li & Fangfang Fan & Li Ma & Ziran Tang, 2016. "Energy Utilization Evaluation of Carbon Performance in Public Projects by FAHP and Cloud Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Harry Clarke, 2014. "Evaluating Infrastructure Projects under Risk and Uncertainty: A Checklist of Issues," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 47(1), pages 147-156, March.
    5. Magdalena Ligus, 2017. "Evaluation of Economic, Social and Environmental Effects of Low-Emission Energy Technologies Development in Poland: A Multi-Criteria Analysis with Application of a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FA," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Kahraman, Cengiz & Kaya, İhsan & Cebi, Selcuk, 2009. "A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1603-1616.
    7. Rakan Alyamani & Suzanna Long & Mohammad Nurunnabi, 2020. "Exploring the Relationship between Sustainable Projects and Institutional Isomorphisms: A Project Typology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Jolanta Tamošaitienė, 2018. "Construction Projects Assessment Based on the Sustainable Development Criteria by an Integrated Fuzzy AHP and Improved GRA Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Huang, Chi-Cheng & Chu, Pin-Yu & Chiang, Yu-Hsiu, 2008. "A fuzzy AHP application in government-sponsored R&D project selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1038-1052, December.
    10. Luthra, Sunil & Kumar, Sanjay & Garg, Dixit & Haleem, Abid, 2015. "Barriers to renewable/sustainable energy technologies adoption: Indian perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 762-776.
    11. Ghozlane Fleury-Bahi & Marie Préau & Thouraya Annabi-Attia & Aurore Marcouyeux & Inga Wittenberg, 2015. "Perceived health and quality of life: the effect of exposure to atmospheric pollution," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 127-138, February.
    12. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    13. Kahraman, Cengiz & Cebeci, Ufuk & Ruan, Da, 2004. "Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 171-184, January.
    14. Hao-Chang Tsai & An-Sheng Lee & Huang-Ning Lee & Chien-Nan Chen & Yu-Chun Liu, 2020. "An Application of the Fuzzy Delphi Method and Fuzzy AHP on the Discussion of Training Indicators for the Regional Competition, Taiwan National Skills Competition, in the Trade of Joinery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Jozef Švajlenka & Mária Kozlovská & Terézia Pošiváková, 2018. "Analysis of Selected Building Constructions Used in Industrial Construction in Terms of Sustainability Benefits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, November.
    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. Chaofeng Li & Yasir Ahmed Solangi & Sharafat Ali, 2023. "Evaluating the Factors of Green Finance to Achieve Carbon Peak and Carbon Neutrality Targets in China: A Delphi and Fuzzy AHP Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Rakan Alyamani & Suzanna Long & Mohammad Nurunnabi, 2021. "Evaluating Decision Making in Sustainable Project Selection Between Literature and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Gianpaolo Abatecola & Alberto Surace, 2020. "Discussing the Use of Complexity Theory in Engineering Management: Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-24, December.
    4. Simon P. Philbin, 2021. "Driving Sustainability through Engineering Management and Systems Engineering," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-7, June.
    5. Teodora M. Șoimoșan & Ligia M. Moga & Livia Anastasiu & Daniela L. Manea & Aurica Căzilă & Čedomir Zeljković, 2021. "Overall Efficiency of On-Site Production and Storage of Solar Thermal Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    3. Wanke, Peter Fernandes & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel José & Moreira Antunes, Jorge Junio & Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz & Roubaud, David & Sobreiro, Vinicius Amorim & Santibanez Gonzalez‬, Erne, 2021. "An original information entropy-based quantitative evaluation model for low-carbon operations in an emerging market," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    4. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    5. Pınar Kaya Samut, 2017. "Integrated FANP-f-MIGP model for supplier selection in the renewable energy sector," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 427-450, May.
    6. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    7. Punia Sindhu, Sonal & Nehra, Vijay & Luthra, Sunil, 2016. "Recognition and prioritization of challenges in growth of solar energy using analytical hierarchy process: Indian outlook," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 332-348.
    8. Alev Taskin Gumus & A. Yesim Yayla & Erkan Çelik & Aytac Yildiz, 2013. "A Combined Fuzzy-AHP and Fuzzy-GRA Methodology for Hydrogen Energy Storage Method Selection in Turkey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    10. Ali RezaHoseini & Zahra Rahmani & Morteza BagherPour, 2022. "Performance evaluation of sustainable projects: a possibilistic integrated novel analytic hierarchy process-data envelopment analysis approach using Z-Number information," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3198-3257, March.
    11. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Empirical investigation and validation of sustainability indicators for the assessment of energy sources in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Kabir, Golam & Sumi, Razia Sultana, 2014. "Power substation location selection using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and PROMETHEE: A case study from Bangladesh," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 717-730.
    13. Murat İnce & Tuncay Yiğit & Ali Hakan Işik, 2020. "A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy AHP-GA Method for Test Sheet Question Selection," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(02), pages 629-647, April.
    14. Wei-Ming Wang & Hsiao-Han Peng, 2020. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework for Urban Sustainable Development," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, March.
    15. Fanhui Zeng & Xiaozhao Cheng & Jianchun Guo & Liang Tao & Zhangxin Chen, 2017. "Hybridising Human Judgment, AHP, Grey Theory, and Fuzzy Expert Systems for Candidate Well Selection in Fractured Reservoirs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    16. Kaya, İhsan, 2012. "Evaluation of outsourcing alternatives under fuzzy environment for waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 107-118.
    17. Lupo, Toni, 2013. "Handling stakeholder uncertain judgments in strategic transport service analyses," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 54-63.
    18. Kajal Chatterjee & Sheikh Ahmed Hossain & Samarjit Kar, 2018. "Prioritization of project proposals in portfolio management using fuzzy AHP," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(2), pages 478-501, June.
    19. Balci, Gökcay & Cetin, Ismail Bilge & Esmer, Soner, 2018. "An evaluation of competition and selection criteria between dry bulk terminals in Izmir," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 294-304.
    20. Yu-Cheng Wang & Tin-Chih Toly Chen, 2019. "A Partial-Consensus Posterior-Aggregation FAHP Method—Supplier Selection Problem as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-15, 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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8314-:d:425554. 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.