IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v175y2022ics0040162521008222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comprehensive minimum cost consensus model for large scale group decision making for circular economy measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Rodríguez, Rosa M.
  • Labella, Álvaro
  • Nuñez-Cacho, Pedro
  • Molina-Moreno, Valentin
  • Martínez, Luis

Abstract

Since the first report on the Circular Economy (CE) appeared in 2013, there has been an explosion of interest in the subject by society and the business world. Thus, a base of academic literature has been developed, seeking the establishment of principles that serve as a theoretical foundation for the concept of CE. Governments demand to know how organizations are evolving in the transition towards the new production model. However, despite the efforts of researchers and companies to develop effective measurement systems, it is not easy to decide which aspects to measure, nor to determine the degree of intensity in which an organization implements the CE model. The measurement proposals combine different methodologies that are costly and time consuming procedures. We propose a comprehensive minimum cost consensus model for large scale group decision making, in which the initial experts’ preferences are automatically adjusted to obtain the measurement and cost of indicators, so that they might agree on the measurements implemented. The main aim of this research is not only to provide a quick, useful and correct method for measuring the CE, but also to show its correctness, advantages and usefulness by comparing its performance with a real case.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodríguez, Rosa M. & Labella, Álvaro & Nuñez-Cacho, Pedro & Molina-Moreno, Valentin & Martínez, Luis, 2022. "A comprehensive minimum cost consensus model for large scale group decision making for circular economy measurement," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:175:y:2022:i:c:s0040162521008222
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162521008222
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121391?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. Modgil, Sachin & Gupta, Shivam & Sivarajah, Uthayasankar & Bhushan, Bharat, 2021. "Big data-enabled large-scale group decision making for circular economy: An emerging market context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    2. Patrik Eklund & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Harrie Swart, 2008. "A consensus model of political decision-making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 5-20, February.
    3. Pedro Núñez-Cacho & Valentín Molina-Moreno & Francisco A. Corpas-Iglesias & Francisco J. Cortés-García, 2018. "Family Businesses Transitioning to a Circular Economy Model: The Case of “Mercadona”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Pei Wang & Xuanhua Xu & Shuai Huang, 2019. "An Improved Consensus-Based Model for Large Group Decision Making Problems Considering Experts with Linguistic Weighted Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 619-640, June.
    5. Sabina Scarpellini & Pilar Portillo-Tarragona & Alfonso Aranda-Usón & Fernando Llena-Macarulla, 2019. "Definition and measurement of the circular economy’s regional impact," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(13), pages 2211-2237, November.
    6. Nasir, Mohammed Haneef Abdul & Genovese, Andrea & Acquaye, Adolf A. & Koh, S.C.L. & Yamoah, Fred, 2017. "Comparing linear and circular supply chains: A case study from the construction industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(PB), pages 443-457.
    7. Andreas Mayer & Willi Haas & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Fridolin Krausmann & Philip Nuss & Gian Andrea Blengini, 2019. "Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(1), pages 62-76, February.
    8. Zhang, Bowen & Dong, Yucheng & Zhang, Hengjie & Pedrycz, Witold, 2020. "Consensus mechanism with maximum-return modifications and minimum-cost feedback: A perspective of game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 546-559.
    9. Cheng, Dong & Zhou, Zhili & Cheng, Faxin & Zhou, Yanfang & Xie, Yujing, 2018. "Modeling the minimum cost consensus problem in an asymmetric costs context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(3), pages 1122-1137.
    10. Hayes, Samantha & Desha, Cheryl & Baumeister, Dayna, 2020. "Learning from nature – Biomimicry innovation to support infrastructure sustainability and resilience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    11. Eklund, Patrik & Rusinowska, Agnieszka & De Swart, Harrie, 2007. "Consensus reaching in committees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 185-193, April.
    12. Witjes, Sjors & Lozano, Rodrigo, 2016. "Towards a more Circular Economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and sustainable business models," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 37-44.
    13. Guzzo, Daniel & Rodrigues, Vinicius Picanço & Mascarenhas, Janaina, 2021. "A systems representation of the Circular Economy: Transition scenarios in the electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    14. Gong, Zaiwu & Zhang, Huanhuan & Forrest, Jeffrey & Li, Lianshui & Xu, Xiaoxia, 2015. "Two consensus models based on the minimum cost and maximum return regarding either all individuals or one individual," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 183-192.
    15. Stephen Polasky & Gretchen Daily, 2021. "An Introduction to the Economics of Natural Capital," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 87-94.
    16. Pedro Núñez-Cacho & Juan Carlos Leyva-Díaz & Jorge Sánchez-Molina & Rody Van der Gun, 2020. "Plastics and sustainable purchase decisions in a circular economy: The case of Dutch food industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, September.
    17. Labella, Álvaro & Liu, Hongbin & Rodríguez, Rosa M. & Martínez, Luis, 2020. "A Cost Consensus Metric for Consensus Reaching Processes based on a comprehensive minimum cost model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 316-331.
    18. Pedro Nuñez-Cacho & Jaroslaw Górecki & Valentín Molina-Moreno & Francisco A. Corpas-Iglesias, 2018. "What Gets Measured, Gets Done: Development of a Circular Economy Measurement Scale for Building Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
    19. Iakovou, E. & Moussiopoulos, N. & Xanthopoulos, A. & Achillas, Ch. & Michailidis, N. & Chatzipanagioti, M. & Koroneos, C. & Bouzakis, K.-D. & Kikis, V., 2009. "A methodological framework for end-of-life management of electronic products," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 329-339.
    20. Jiménez Rivero, Ana & Sathre, Roger & García Navarro, Justo, 2016. "Life cycle energy and material flow implications of gypsum plasterboard recycling in the European Union," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 171-181.
    21. Mateusz Lewandowski, 2016. "Designing the Business Models for Circular Economy—Towards the Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-28, January.
    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. Kraus, Sascha & Kumar, Satish & Lim, Weng Marc & Kaur, Jaspreet & Sharma, Anuj & Schiavone, Francesco, 2023. "From moon landing to metaverse: Tracing the evolution of Technological Forecasting and Social Change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Luliang Liu & Yuanming Dou & Jiangang Qiao, 2022. "Evaluation Method of Highway Plant Slope Based on Rough Set Theory and Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Case Study in Taihang Mountain, Hebei, China," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Bing Yan & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Yuting Huang, 2022. "A Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy Group Decision Framework and Its Application in Urban Rail Transit System Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Pablo Piñones & Ivan Derpich & Ricardo Venegas, 2023. "Circular Economy 4.0 Evaluation Model for Urban Road Infrastructure Projects, CIROAD," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-32, February.
    5. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    6. Maria Cristina Zaccone & Cristina Santhià & Martina Bosone, 2022. "How Hybrid Organizations Adopt Circular Economy Models to Foster Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, February.

    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. Meng, Fan-Yong & Gong, Zai-Wu & Pedrycz, Witold & Chu, Jun-Fei, 2023. "Selfish-dilemma consensus analysis for group decision making in the perspective of cooperative game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 290-305.
    2. Gong, Zaiwu & Guo, Weiwei & Słowiński, Roman, 2021. "Transaction and interaction behavior-based consensus model and its application to optimal carbon emission reduction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    3. Cheng, Dong & Yuan, Yuxiang & Wu, Yong & Hao, Tiantian & Cheng, Faxin, 2022. "Maximum satisfaction consensus with budget constraints considering individual tolerance and compromise limit behaviors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 221-238.
    4. Guo, Weiwei & Gong, Zaiwu & Zhang, Wei-Guo & Xu, Yanxin, 2023. "Minimum cost consensus modeling under dynamic feedback regulation mechanism considering consensus principle and tolerance level," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1279-1295.
    5. González-Arteaga, T. & Alcantud, J.C.R. & de Andrés Calle, R., 2016. "A cardinal dissensus measure based on the Mahalanobis distance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 575-585.
    6. Ying Ji & Huanhuan Li & Huijie Zhang, 2022. "Risk-Averse Two-Stage Stochastic Minimum Cost Consensus Models with Asymmetric Adjustment Cost," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 261-291, April.
    7. Augusto Bianchini & Jessica Rossi & Marco Pellegrini, 2019. "Overcoming the Main Barriers of Circular Economy Implementation through a New Visualization Tool for Circular Business Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-33, November.
    8. Li, Ying & Liu, Peide & Li, Gang, 2023. "An asymmetric cost consensus based failure mode and effect analysis method with personalized risk attitude information," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    9. Claudia Aparecida De Mattos & Thiago Lourenço Meira De Albuquerque, 2018. "Enabling Factors and Strategies for the Transition Toward a Circular Economy (CE)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    10. Daozhi Zhao & Jiaqin Hao & Cejun Cao & Hongshuai Han, 2019. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Three-Player for Low-Carbon Production Capacity Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "From conventional group decision making to large-scale group decision making: What are the challenges and how to meet them in big data era? A state-of-the-art survey," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Castro-Lopez, Adrian & Iglesias, Victor & Santos-Vijande, María Leticia, 2023. "Organizational capabilities and institutional pressures in the adoption of circular economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    13. Zhang, Bowen & Dong, Yucheng & Zhang, Hengjie & Pedrycz, Witold, 2020. "Consensus mechanism with maximum-return modifications and minimum-cost feedback: A perspective of game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 546-559.
    14. Elena Aurelia Botezat & Anca Otilia Dodescu & Sebastian Văduva & Silvia Liana Fotea, 2018. "An Exploration of Circular Economy Practices and Performance Among Romanian Producers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Zhang, Hengjie & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Yu, Shui, 2019. "Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 580-598.
    16. Li Bai & F. Javier Sendra Garcia & Arunodaya Raj Mishra, 2022. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Adoption of the sustainable circular supply chain under disruptions risk in manufacturing industry using an integrated fuzzy decision-making approach," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 743-759, December.
    17. Leonora Charlotte Malabi Eberhardt & Anne van Stijn & Freja Nygaard Rasmussen & Morten Birkved & Harpa Birgisdottir, 2020. "Development of a Life Cycle Assessment Allocation Approach for Circular Economy in the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    18. Pedro Nuñez-Cacho & Jaroslaw Górecki & Valentín Molina-Moreno & Francisco A. Corpas-Iglesias, 2018. "What Gets Measured, Gets Done: Development of a Circular Economy Measurement Scale for Building Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
    19. Yuanming Li & Ying Ji & Shaojian Qu, 2022. "Consensus Building for Uncertain Large-Scale Group Decision-Making Based on the Clustering Algorithm and Robust Discrete Optimization," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 453-489, April.
    20. José Luis Ruiz-Real & Juan Uribe-Toril & Jaime De Pablo Valenciano & Juan Carlos Gázquez-Abad, 2018. "Worldwide Research on Circular Economy and Environment: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-14, November.

    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:tefoso:v:175:y:2022:i:c:s0040162521008222. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.