IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment


  • Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani

    () (School of Engineering, Catholic University of the North, Larrondo 1281, Coquimbo, Chile)

  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas

    () (Institute of Sustainable Construction, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekis ave. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Payam Khazaelpour

    () (Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Curtin University, Kent U1987, Perth, Australia)

  • Fausto Cavallaro

    () (Department of Economics, University of Molise, Via De Sanctis, 86100 Campobasso, Italy)


Over the past few centuries, the process of decision-making has become more complicated in different respects. Since the initial phase of Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) around fifty years ago, Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) has continued developing over the years as a sub-concept of MCDM. Noticeably, the importance of the decision-making process is increasingly expanding to such an extent that it necessarily blends into the undeniable processes of MADM actual models. Novel methods with different perspectives have been introduced considering the dynamic MADM concepts of time and future in classical frameworks; however, they do not overcome challenges in practice. Recently, Prospective MADM (PMADM) as a specific approach has presented future-oriented models using already known approaches of MCDM, and it has innovative items which show barriers of classic model of MADM. However, PMADM practically needs more conceptual bases to illustrate and plan the future of real decision-making problems. The Multi-Aspect Criterion is a new concept in mapping the future of the PMADM outline. In this regard, two examples of sustainability will be analyzed, and different requirements and aspects associated with PMADM will be discussed in this study. This new approach can support the PMADM outline in more detail and deal with a decision-making structure that can be considered as novel to industry experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Payam Khazaelpour & Fausto Cavallaro, 2018. "The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4451-:d:185985

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Arms, Hanjo & Wiecher, Mathias & Kleiderman, Valeska, 2012. "Dynamic models for managing big decisions," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 70115, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    2. Bous, Géraldine & Fortemps, Philippe & Glineur, François & Pirlot, Marc, 2010. "ACUTA: A novel method for eliciting additive value functions on the basis of holistic preference statements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(2), pages 435-444, October.
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1600-:d:146719 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2013. "Evaluating future scenarios for the power generation sector using a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool: The Portuguese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 126-136.
    5. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Reza Maknoon & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2016. "Multiple attribute decision making (MADM) based scenarios," International Journal of Strategic Property Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 101-111, March.
    6. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3275-:d:169638 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Browne, David & O'Regan, Bernadette & Moles, Richard, 2010. "Use of multi-criteria decision analysis to explore alternative domestic energy and electricity policy scenarios in an Irish city-region," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 518-528.
    8. Štreimikienė, Dalia & Šliogerienė, Jūratė & Turskis, Zenonas, 2016. "Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation technologies in Lithuania," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 148-156.
    9. Tommi Gustafsson & Ahti Salo & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, 2003. "Multicriteria methods for technology foresight," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2-3), pages 235-255.
    10. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2010. "Fuzzy TOPSIS approach for assessing thermal-energy storage in concentrated solar power (CSP) systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 496-503, February.
    11. Grigoroudis, E. & Siskos, Y., 2002. "Preference disaggregation for measuring and analysing customer satisfaction: The MUSA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 148-170, November.
    12. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:6:p:911-:d:99936 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Roubens, Marc, 1982. "Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-55, May.
    14. Yingdong He & Zhen He & Yujia Deng & Panpan Zhou, 2016. "IFPBMs and their application to multiple attribute group decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(1), pages 127-147, January.
    15. Fausto Cavallaro & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Saulius Raslanas, 2016. "Evaluation of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems Using Fuzzy Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(6), pages 1-21, June.
    16. Supriyasilp, Thanaporn & Pongput, Kobkiat & Boonyasirikul, Thana, 2009. "Hydropower development priority using MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1866-1875, May.
    17. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    18. Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1986. "On the problem of weights in multiple criteria decision making (the noncompensatory approach)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 288-294, February.
    19. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    20. repec:wly:navres:v:35:y:1988:i:6:p:543-566 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Dirk Meissner & Alexander Sokolov, 2013. "Foresight and science, technology and innovation indicators," Chapters,in: Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement, chapter 16, pages 381-402 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1700-:d:148536 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1198-:d:208691 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3314-:d:240231 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2236-:d:222574 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item


    Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM); Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM); Prospective Multiple Attribute Decision Making (PMADM); Multi-Aspect Criterion; Futures Studies; future; sustainability;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products


    Access and download statistics


    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:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4451-:d:185985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.