IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i9p2179-d353135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multi-Criteria Approach for the Evaluation of Low Risk Restoration Projects in Continuous Surface Lignite Mines

Author

Listed:
  • Philip-Mark Spanidis

    (ASPROFOS Engineering, Division of Project Management, 17675 Athens, Greece)

  • Christos Roumpos

    (Mining Engineering Department, Public Power Corporation of Greece, 10432 Athens, Greece)

  • Francis Pavloudakis

    (Mining Engineering Department, Public Power Corporation of Greece, 10432 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

The restoration of continuous surface lignite mines entering the closure phase is a long-term, complex and multidisciplinary project. During the evaluation of alternative restoration technologies, various environmental, technical, economic and social parameters are investigated. In this framework, for the selection of the lower risk restoration alternative, the analysis of the associated risks should be incorporated into the decision-making process. This work provides an overview of practical risk management problems and solutions in mining restoration projects. Moreover, it introduces a multi-criteria methodology for the improvement of the decision-making process in the evaluation of restoration alternatives and the selection of the optimal one, considering a continuous surface mining project. The proposed method is a combination of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for the quantification of risk factors and the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) for the ranking of restoration alternatives based on a low risk approach. The results of the case study indicate that the proposed approach can be utilized as a low cost and easy-to-apply tool, appropriate for coal mining operators, managers and stakeholders involved in the planning and implementation of post-mining land restoration activities. Furthermore, the suggested methodology could be adopted to support the risk management needs in the restoration stage of complex surface mining projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip-Mark Spanidis & Christos Roumpos & Francis Pavloudakis, 2020. "A Multi-Criteria Approach for the Evaluation of Low Risk Restoration Projects in Continuous Surface Lignite Mines," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:9:p:2179-:d:353135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/9/2179/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/9/2179/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ali Emrouznejad & Marianna Marra, 2017. "The state of the art development of AHP (1979–2017): a literature review with a social network analysis," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(22), pages 6653-6675, November.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    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. Jiskani, Izhar Mithal & Cai, Qingxiang & Zhou, Wei & Lu, Xiang, 2020. "Assessment of risks impeding sustainable mining in Pakistan using fuzzy synthetic evaluation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    2. Zbigniew Kasztelewicz & Mateusz Sikora & Maciej Zajączkowski, 2020. "Method of Selecting Opening Cut Location Using Multi-Criteria Analysis of Decision Variant Mapping," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    3. Michał Patyk & Przemysław Bodziony, 2022. "Application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process to Select the Most Appropriate Mining Equipment for the Exploitation of Secondary Deposits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Yitbarek, Tibebe Weldesemaet & Wilson, John R.U. & Dehnen-Schmutz, Katharina, 2023. "A governance framework for the design and evaluation of tree planting schemes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    5. Philip-Mark Spanidis & Christos Roumpos & Francis Pavloudakis, 2021. "A Fuzzy-AHP Methodology for Planning the Risk Management of Natural Hazards in Surface Mining Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Sandra Lourenço Amaro & Sofia Barbosa & Gloria Ammerer & Aina Bruno & Jordi Guimerà & Ioannis Orfanoudakis & Anna Ostręga & Evangelia Mylona & Jessica Strydom & Michael Hitch, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Evaluating Transitional and Post-Mining Options—An Innovative Perspective from the EIT ReviRIS Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, February.
    7. Andrzej Bialas, 2022. "Towards a Software Tool Supporting Decisions in Planning Heap Revitalization Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-33, February.
    8. Philip-Mark Spanidis & Christos Roumpos & Francis Pavloudakis, 2023. "Evaluation of Strategies for the Sustainable Transformation of Surface Coal Mines Using a Combined SWOT–AHP Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.

    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. Snežana Tadić & Mladen Krstić & Milovan Kovač, 2023. "Assessment of city logistics initiative categories sustainability: case of Belgrade," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 1383-1419, February.
    2. Jose Martino Neto & Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Miguel Angel Ortiz-Barrios & Antonella Petrillo, 2023. "Compatibility and correlation of multi-attribute decision making: a case of industrial relocation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 831-852, July.
    3. Ravindra Kumar & Rajeev Kumar Mishra & Satish Chandra & Asif Hussain, 2021. "Evaluation of urban transport-environment sustainable indicators during Odd–Even scheme in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(12), pages 17240-17262, December.
    4. Bruce Golden & Linus Schrage & Douglas Shier & Lida Anna Apergi, 2021. "The power of linear programming: some surprising and unexpected LPs," 4OR, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 15-40, March.
    5. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    6. C. Acuña-Soto & V. Liern & B. Pérez-Gladish, 2021. "Normalization in TOPSIS-based approaches with data of different nature: application to the ranking of mathematical videos," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 541-569, January.
    7. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    8. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    9. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    10. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    13. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    14. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    15. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    16. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    17. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.
    18. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    19. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    20. Jha, Madan K. & Chowdary, V.M. & Kulkarni, Y. & Mal, B.C., 2014. "Rainwater harvesting planning using geospatial techniques and multicriteria decision analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 96-111.

    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:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:9:p:2179-:d:353135. 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.