IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i13p3508-d1693758.html

A Strategic Hydrogen Supplier Assessment Using a Hybrid MCDA Framework with a Game Theory-Driven Criteria Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jettarat Janmontree

    (Institute for Engineering of Products and Systems, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Aditya Shinde

    (Institute for Engineering of Products and Systems, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Hartmut Zadek

    (Institute for Engineering of Products and Systems, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Sebastian Trojahn

    (Department of Economics, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences Bernburg, 06406 Bernburg, Germany)

  • Kasin Ransikarbum

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Ubonratchathani University, Ubonratchathani 34190, Thailand)

Abstract

Effective management of the hydrogen supply chain (HSC), starting with supplier selection, is crucial for advancing the hydrogen industry and economy. Supplier selection, a complex Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) problem in an inherently uncertain environment, requires careful consideration. This study proposes a novel hybrid MCDA framework that integrates the Bayesian Best–Worst Method (BWM), Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and Entropy Weight Method (EWM) for robust criteria weighting, which is aggregated using a game theory-based model to resolve inconsistencies and capture the complementary strengths of each technique. Next, the globally weighted criteria, emphasizing sustainability performance and techno-risk considerations, are used in the TODIM method grounded in prospect theory to rank hydrogen suppliers. Numerical experiments demonstrate the approach’s ability to enhance decision robustness compared to standalone MCDA methods. The comparative evaluation and sensitivity analysis confirm the stability and reliability of the proposed method, offering valuable insights for strategic supplier selection in the evolving hydrogen landscape in the HSC.

Suggested Citation

  • Jettarat Janmontree & Aditya Shinde & Hartmut Zadek & Sebastian Trojahn & Kasin Ransikarbum, 2025. "A Strategic Hydrogen Supplier Assessment Using a Hybrid MCDA Framework with a Game Theory-Driven Criteria Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-27, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:13:p:3508-:d:1693758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/13/3508/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/13/3508/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zongao Xie & Qihang Jin & Guanli Su & Wei Lu, 2024. "A Review of Hydrogen Storage and Transportation: Progresses and Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-30, August.
    2. Ziyuan Xie & Guixian Tian & Yongchao Tao, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework for Sustainable Supplier Selection in the Circular Economy and Industry 4.0 Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Kasin Ransikarbum & Hartmut Zadek & Jettarat Janmontree, 2024. "Evaluating Renewable Energy Sites in the Green Hydrogen Supply Chain with Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Sarkis, Joseph & Dhavale, Dileep G., 2015. "Supplier selection for sustainable operations: A triple-bottom-line approach using a Bayesian framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 177-191.
    5. Yu Han & Woon Kian Chong & Dong Li, 2020. "A systematic literature review of the capabilities and performance metrics of supply chain resilience," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(15), pages 4541-4566, July.
    6. Thi-Ly Nguyen & Phi-Hung Nguyen & Hong-Anh Pham & Thi-Giang Nguyen & Duc-Thinh Nguyen & Thi-Hoai Tran & Hong-Cham Le & Huong-Thuy Phung, 2022. "A Novel Integrating Data Envelopment Analysis and Spherical Fuzzy MCDM Approach for Sustainable Supplier Selection in Steel Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-28, June.
    7. Xuan, Ang & Sun, Yingfei & Liu, Zhengguang & Zheng, Peijun & Peng, Weike, 2025. "An ADMM-based tripartite distributed planning approach in integrated electricity and natural gas system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 388(C).
    8. Zhu, Shijie & Shi, Xilin & Yang, Chunhe & Bai, Weizheng & Wei, Xinxing & Yang, Kun & Li, Peng & Li, Hang & Li, Yinping & Wang, Guibin, 2024. "Site selection evaluation for salt cavern hydrogen storage in China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    9. Alipour, M. & Hafezi, R. & Rani, Pratibha & Hafezi, Mehdi & Mardani, Abbas, 2021. "A new Pythagorean fuzzy-based decision-making method through entropy measure for fuel cell and hydrogen components supplier selection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    10. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    11. Edward I. Altman, 1968. "Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis And The Prediction Of Corporate Bankruptcy," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 23(4), pages 589-609, September.
    12. Gregory Trencher & Achmed Edianto, 2021. "Drivers and Barriers to the Adoption of Fuel Cell Passenger Vehicles and Buses in Germany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    14. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    15. Edward I. Altman, 1968. "The Prediction Of Corporate Bankruptcy: A Discriminant Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 23(1), pages 193-194, March.
    16. Markus Reuß & Paris Dimos & Aline Léon & Thomas Grube & Martin Robinius & Detlef Stolten, 2021. "Hydrogen Road Transport Analysis in the Energy System: A Case Study for Germany through 2050," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Ehsan Shekarian & Behrang Ijadi & Amirreza Zare & Jukka Majava, 2022. "Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Industrial Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-30, June.
    18. Azadnia, Amir Hossein & McDaid, Conor & Andwari, Amin Mahmoudzadeh & Hosseini, Seyed Ehsan, 2023. "Green hydrogen supply chain risk analysis: A european hard-to-abate sectors perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Busch, P. & Kendall, A. & Lipman, T., 2023. "A systematic review of life cycle greenhouse gas intensity values for hydrogen production pathways," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    20. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Bayesian best-worst method: A probabilistic group decision making model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    21. Hashemi, Seyed Hamid & Karimi, Amir & Tavana, Madjid, 2015. "An integrated green supplier selection approach with analytic network process and improved Grey relational analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 178-191.
    22. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2018. "An analysis of the generalized TODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(3), pages 1041-1049.
    23. Bolz, Susanna & Thiele, Julian & Wendler, Tobias, 2024. "Regional capabilities and hydrogen adoption barriers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "Better decisions with less cognitive load: The Parsimonious BWM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    3. Ayşe Pınar Özyılmaz & Fehmi Samet Demirci & Ozan Okudan & Zeynep Işık, 2025. "Developing Performance Measurement Framework for Sustainable Facility Management (SFM) in Office Buildings Using Bayesian Best Worst Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-26, July.
    4. Junnan Wu & Xin Liu & Dianqi Pan & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Kai Ke, 2023. "Research on Safety Evaluation of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Based on Improved Best-Worst Method and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Yang, Hua & Xu, Yong & Zhou, Kan & Li, Jiuyi, 2024. "Mapping development potential and priority zones for utility-scale photovoltaic on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(PA).
    7. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    8. Lin, Xueshan & Huang, Tao & Bompard, Ettore & Wang, Beibei & Zheng, Yaxian, 2023. "Ex-ante market power evaluation and mitigation in day-ahead electricity market considering market maturity levels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    9. Göçmen Polat, Elifcan & Yücesan, Melih & Gül, Muhammet, 2023. "A comparative framework for criticality assessment of strategic raw materials in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    10. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.
    11. Vineet Kaushik & Shobha Tewari, 2023. "Modeling Opportunity Indicators Fostering Social Entrepreneurship: A Hybrid Delphi and Best-Worst Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 667-698, August.
    12. Jian Wang & Jin-Chun Huang & Shan-Lin Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Ting Zhu, 2021. "Improvement Path for Resource-Constrained Cities Identified Using an Environmental Co-Governance Assessment Framework Based on BWM-mV Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-30, May.
    13. Jie Lu & Feng Li & Desheng Wu, 2024. "A Two-Stage Sustainable Supplier Selection Model Considering Disruption Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-20, May.
    14. Mohammad Zahirul Khaiyum & Sudipa Sarker & Golam Kabir, 2023. "Evaluation of Carbon Emission Factors in the Cement Industry: An Emerging Economy Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-15, October.
    15. Murad, C.A. & Bellinello, M.M. & Silva, A.J. & Netto, A. Caminada & de Souza, G.F.M. & Nabeta, S.I., 2022. "A novel methodology employed for ranking and consolidating performance indicators in holding companies with multiple power plants based on multi-criteria decision-making method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    16. Kheybari, Siamak & Javdanmehr, Mahsa & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Rezaei, Jafar, 2021. "Corn cultivation location selection for bioethanol production: An application of BWM and extended PROMETHEE II," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    17. Mangu, Sriram & Kadali, B. Raghuram & Subbarao, Saladi S.V. & Lin, Jen-Jia, 2025. "Evaluation of transit-oriented development based on 9D’s approach in developing countries context," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 138-151.
    18. Ananna Paul & Nagesh Shukla & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Andrea Trianni, 2021. "Sustainable Supply Chain Management and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-28, June.
    19. Siamak Kheybari & Mohammad Reza Mehrpour & Paul Bauer & Alessio Ishizaka, 2024. "How Can Risk-Averse and Risk-Taking Approaches be Considered in a Group Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problem?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 883-909, August.
    20. Le Ngo Ngoc Thu & Long Van Hoang & Quynh Manh Doan & Nguyen Tan Huynh, 2024. "The performance model of logistic distribution centers: Quality function deployment based on the Best-Worst Method," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(10), pages 1-21, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:18:y:2025:i:13:p:3508-:d:1693758. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.