IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8216-d599591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Decision Making in Sustainable Project Selection Between Literature and Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Rakan Alyamani

    (Department of Engineering Management, Prince Sultan University, P.O. Box 66833, Riyadh 11586, Saudi Arabia
    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)

  • Mohammad Nurunnabi

    (Department of Accounting, Prince Sultan University, P.O. Box 66833, Riyadh 11586, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

A robust project selection process is critical for the selection of sustainable projects that meet the needs of an organization or community. There are multiple factors or criteria that can be considered in the selection of the appropriate sustainable project, but it can be challenging to find sufficient depth of expert opinion to perform a strong evaluation of these criteria. Several researchers have turned to the sustainable project literature as a source of expert opinion to evaluate the criteria used in sustainable project selection and rank them based on importance using different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies. However, using the literature as a source of expert opinion poses a different set of challenges and may not accurately represent the actual opinions of sustainable project subject matter experts (SMEs) and practitioners. In this study, the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) methodology is used to determine the importance of project cost, project maturity, skill and experience, uncertainty, and technology information transfer as selection criteria using collected opinions from academic sustainable project experts and practitioners. The results are then compared with previous research that used the literature to rank these five criteria based on importance when selecting between multiple sustainable project alternatives. The results show that project cost is still considered the major driver of decision making in sustainable project selection by both the literature and practice. However, unlike the literature-as-experts approach, SMEs prioritize skill and experience and technology information transfer over project maturity and uncertainty. Project managers and decision makers can use these findings to best prioritize the types of challenges that may occur depending on inputs for the FAHP analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8216-:d:599591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8216/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8216/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    2. 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.
    3. Yasir Ahmed Solangi & Qingmei Tan & Muhammad Waris Ali Khan & Nayyar Hussain Mirjat & Ifzal Ahmed, 2018. "The Selection of Wind Power Project Location in the Southeastern Corridor of Pakistan: A Factor Analysis, AHP, and Fuzzy-TOPSIS Application," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-26, July.
    4. 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.
    5. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    6. Karatas, Mumtaz & Sulukan, Egemen & Karacan, Ilknur, 2018. "Assessment of Turkey's energy management performance via a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 890-912.
    7. Azdren Doli & Dastan Bamwesigye & Petra Hlaváčková & Jitka Fialová & Petr Kupec & Obed Asamoah, 2021. "Forest Park Visitors Opinions and Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Development of the Germia Forest and Recreational Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    8. 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.
    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. Orlando Lima & Gabriela Fernandes & Anabela Tereso, 2023. "Benefits of Adopting Innovation and Sustainability Practices in Project Management within the SME Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    2. Kucher, Lesia & Hełdak, Maria & Orochovska, Lyudmila, 2023. "Assessment of the readiness of agrarian enterprises to implement innovative projects," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 9(1), March.

    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. López-González, A. & Ferrer-Martí, L. & Domenech, B., 2019. "Sustainable rural electrification planning in developing countries: A proposal for electrification of isolated communities of Venezuela," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 327-338.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur & Mukul, Esin, 2018. "A novel renewable energy selection model for United Nations' sustainable development goals," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PA), pages 290-302.
    5. Magdalena Ligus & Piotr Peternek, 2021. "The Sustainable Energy Development Index—An Application for European Union Member States," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-32, February.
    6. Sandra L. Cobos-Mora & José Guamán-Aucapiña & Jonathan Zúñiga-Ruiz, 2023. "Suitable site selection for transfer stations in a solid waste management system using analytical hierarchy process as a multi-criteria decision analysis: a case study in Azuay-Ecuador," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 1944-1977, February.
    7. Xiongyong Zhou & Zhiduan Xu, 2018. "An Integrated Sustainable Supplier Selection Approach Based on Hybrid Information Aggregation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-49, July.
    8. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    9. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    10. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    11. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    13. Chin-Shan Lu & Kuo-Chung Shang & Chi-Chang Lin, 2016. "Examining sustainability performance at ports: port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 909-927, November.
    14. Kebede, Yohannes, 1993. "The Limits to Common Resource Management: The Bypassed Commons or Commons without Tragedy," MPRA Paper 662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 May 1993.
    15. John Stanley & Janet Stanley, 2023. "Improving Appraisal Methodology for Land Use Transport Measures to Reduce Risk of Social Exclusion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    16. Nora Mzavanadze, 2009. "Building A Framework For National Sustainable Development Assessment And Application For Lithuania: Sustainability In Transition," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 97-130.
    17. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    18. Isin Ceti̇n, 2017. "Accounting Requirements And Records On Bank Subscribed Capital Compliance With European Directives," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1, pages 52-68, February.
    19. Jean-Michel Sahuta & Sandrine Boulerne & Medhi Mili & Frédéric Teulon, 2014. "What Relation Exists Between Corporate Social Responsibility (Csr) And Longevity Of Firms?," Working Papers 2014-248, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    20. Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.

    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:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8216-:d:599591. 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.