IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i14p3946-d250025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a Holistic Assessment Framework for Industrial Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Konstantinos G. Aravossis

    (Environmental Economics and Sustainability Unit, Sector of Industrial Management and Operations Research, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, GR 157 80 Athens, Greece)

  • Vasilis C. Kapsalis

    (Environmental Economics and Sustainability Unit, Sector of Industrial Management and Operations Research, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, GR 157 80 Athens, Greece)

  • Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos

    (Environmental Economics and Sustainability Unit, Sector of Industrial Management and Operations Research, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, GR 157 80 Athens, Greece)

  • Theofanis G. Xouleis

    (GREENiT Environmental, GR 104 33 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

The evaluation and selection among the best production practices beyond the conventional linear models is, nowadays, concerned with those holistic approaches drawn toward environmental assessment in industry. Therefore, researchers need to develop an analysis that can evaluate the performance of industrial organization in the light of their environmental viewpoint. This study implemented a pilot co-integrated scheme based on an innovative in-house Holistic Assessment Performance Index for Environment (HAPI-E) industry tool while assimilating the principles of circular economy through the Eco-innovation Development and Implementation Tool (EDIT). For the latter, nine qualitative indicators were motivated and enriched the weighting criteria of the questionnaire. The decomposition of the complexity and preferences mapping was accompanied by a multi-criteria holistic hierarchical analysis methodology in order to synthesize a single index upon a need-driven scoring. This multi-criteria decision approach in industry can quantify the material and process flows, thus enhancing the existing knowledge of manipulating internal resources. The key-criteria were based on administrative, energy, water, emissions, and waste strategies. Subsequently, the HAPI-E industry tool was modeled on the food industry, being particularly focused on pasta-based industrial production. Then, the parameters of this tool were modeled, measured, and evaluated in terms of the environmental impact awareness. The magnitude of necessary improvements was unveiled, while future research orientations were discussed. The HAPI-E industry tool can be utilized as a precautionary methodology on sustainable assessment while incorporating multifaceted and quantification advantages.

Suggested Citation

  • Konstantinos G. Aravossis & Vasilis C. Kapsalis & Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos & Theofanis G. Xouleis, 2019. "Development of a Holistic Assessment Framework for Industrial Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-24, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3946-:d:250025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3946/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3946/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stamatios Ntanos & Michalis Skordoulis & Grigorios Kyriakopoulos & Garyfallos Arabatzis & Miltiadis Chalikias & Spyros Galatsidas & Athanasios Batzios & Apostolia Katsarou, 2018. "Renewable Energy and Economic Growth: Evidence from European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, July.
    2. Theodorou, Savvas & Florides, Georgios & Tassou, Savvas, 2010. "The use of multiple criteria decision making methodologies for the promotion of RES through funding schemes in Cyprus, A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7783-7792, December.
    3. Zografidou, Eleni & Petridis, Konstantinos & Petridis, Nikolaos E. & Arabatzis, Garyfallos, 2017. "A financial approach to renewable energy production in Greece using goal programming," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 37-51.
    4. Karl Widerquist, 2018. "The Bottom Line," Exploring the Basic Income Guarantee, in: A Critical Analysis of Basic Income Experiments for Researchers, Policymakers, and Citizens, chapter 0, pages 93-98, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Bo Weidema, 2014. "Has ISO 14040/44 Failed Its Role as a Standard for Life Cycle Assessment?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 324-326, May.
    6. Suman Gothwal & Rajeev Saha, 2015. "Plant location selection of a manufacturing industry using analytic hierarchy process approach," International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 22(2), pages 235-255.
    7. Krajnc, Damjan & Glavic, Peter, 2005. "How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 551-563, December.
    8. Burton, Jonathan & Hubacek, Klaus, 2007. "Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local governments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6402-6412, December.
    9. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    10. Daim, Tugrul & Yates, Diane & Peng, Yicheng & Jimenez, Bertha, 2009. "Technology assessment for clean energy technologies: The case of the Pacific Northwest," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 232-243.
    11. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    12. Azam, Muhammad & Khan, Abdul Qayyum & Zafeiriou, Eleni & Arabatzis, Garyfallos, 2016. "Socio-economic determinants of energy consumption: An empirical survey for Greece," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1556-1567.
    13. Dianfa Wu & Zhiping Yang & Ningling Wang & Chengzhou Li & Yongping Yang, 2018. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model and AHP Weighting Uncertainty Analysis for Sustainability Assessment of Coal-Fired Power Units," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    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. Theodora Mavridou & Nikolaos Nanos & Lambros Doulos, 2023. "Modular Construction of Industrial Buildings and Lean Thinking—Identifying the Role of Daylight through a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Lucian-Ionel Cioca & Larisa Ivascu & Attila Turi & Alin Artene & George Artur Găman, 2019. "Sustainable Development Model for the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Xiuguo Wu & Yibai Meng, 2022. "Evaluation and Selection of Cement Suppliers under the Background of New and Old Driving Energy Conversion in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Jiayue Liu & Jing Xie, 2020. "Environmental Regulation, Technological Innovation, and Export Competitiveness: An Empirical Study Based on China’s Manufacturing Industry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Hanxiao Wei & Huiqin Yao, 2022. "Environmental Regulation, Roundabout Production, and Industrial Structure Transformation and Upgrading: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Anita Boros & Csaba Fogarassy, 2019. "Relationship between Corporate Sustainability and Compliance with State-Owned Enterprises in Central-Europe: A Case Study from Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-23, October.
    7. Yanbing Mao & Kui Liu & Jizhi Zhou, 2019. "Evolution of Green Industrial Growth between Europe and China based on the Energy Consumption Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Marinko Skare & Beata Gavurova & Martin Rigelsky, 2024. "Transforming power of research and development on inequality and well-being: a European Union perspective within the circular economy framework," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Yuan, Qianqian & Baležentis, Tomas & Shen, Zhiyang & Streimikiene, Dalia, 2021. "Economic and environmental performance of the belt and road countries under convex and nonconvex production technologies," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    10. Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos & Vasilis C. Kapsalis & Konstantinos G. Aravossis & Miltiadis Zamparas & Alexandros Mitsikas, 2019. "Evaluating Circular Economy under a Multi-Parametric Approach: A Technological Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Shaswati Chowdhury & Jaan-Henrik Kain & Marco Adelfio & Yevheniya Volchko & Jenny Norrman, 2020. "Greening the Browns: A Bio-Based Land Use Framework for Analysing the Potential of Urban Brownfields in an Urban Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-30, August.
    12. Xiuguo Wu & Sipeng Wang, 2022. "Evaluation and Temporal-Spatial Evolution of Regional New and Old Driving Force Conversion in Shandong Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    13. Yongrok Choi & Hyoungsuk Lee & Jahira Debbarma, 2020. "Are Global Companies Better in Environmental Efficiency in India? Based on Metafrontier Malmquist CO 2 Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    14. Deniz Ikiz Kaya & Nadia Pintossi & Gamze Dane, 2021. "An Empirical Analysis of Driving Factors and Policy Enablers of Heritage Adaptive Reuse within the Circular Economy Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-24, February.
    15. Mark Anthony Camilleri, 2021. "Sustainable Production and Consumption of Food. Mise-en-Place Circular Economy Policies and Waste Management Practices in Tourism Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-13, September.
    16. Hinrika Droege & Andrea Raggi & Tomás B. Ramos, 2021. "Co‐development of a framework for circular economy assessment in organisations: Learnings from the public sector," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1715-1729, November.

    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. Ahmad, Salman & Tahar, Razman Mat, 2014. "Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: A case of Malaysia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 458-466.
    2. Szántó, Richárd, 2012. "Több szempontú részvételi döntések a fenntarthatósági értékelésekben. A legnépszerűbb módszerek összehasonlítása [Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis. A comparison of methodologies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1336-1355.
    3. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    4. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    5. Yao, Yue & Sun, Deqiang & Xu, Jin-Hua & Wang, Bin & Peng, Guohong & Sun, Bingmei, 2023. "Evaluation of enhanced oil recovery methods for mature continental heavy oil fields in China based on geology, technology and sustainability criteria," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PB).
    6. Mumtaz Karatas, 2017. "Multiattribute Decision Making Using Multiperiod Probabilistic Weighted Fuzzy Axiomatic Design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 318-334, July.
    7. Stamatios Ntanos & Grigorios Kyriakopoulos & Michalis Skordoulis & Miltiadis Chalikias & Garyfallos Arabatzis, 2019. "An Application of the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale in a Greek Context," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Mikkel Bojesen & Luc Boerboom & Hans Skov-Petersen, 2014. "Towards a sustainable capacity expansion of the Danish biogas sector," IFRO Working Paper 2014/03, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    9. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Karabulut, Yağmur, 2017. "Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 549-560.
    10. Jan Macháč & Lenka Zaňková, 2020. "Renewables—To Build or Not? Czech Approach to Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy Sources with an Emphasis on Municipality Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Indre Siksnelyte & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Deepak Sharma, 2018. "An Overview of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Dealing with Sustainable Energy Development Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Huang, Shuangfa & Vazquez-Brust, Diego, 2020. "Evaluating the factors that influence blockchain adoption in the freight logistics industry," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    13. Jamal, Taskin & Urmee, Tania & Shafiullah, G.M., 2020. "Planning of off-grid power supply systems in remote areas using multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    14. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    15. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    16. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    17. Sebastian Fredershausen & Henrik Lechte & Mathias Willnat & Tobias Witt & Christine Harnischmacher & Tim-Benjamin Lembcke & Matthias Klumpp & Lutz Kolbe, 2021. "Towards an Understanding of Hydrogen Supply Chains: A Structured Literature Review Regarding Sustainability Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    18. David Abdul Konneh & Harun Or Rashid Howlader & Ryuto Shigenobu & Tomonobu Senjyu & Shantanu Chakraborty & Narayanan Krishna, 2019. "A Multi-Criteria Decision Maker for Grid-Connected Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems Selection Using Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-36, February.
    19. Akbari, Negar & Irawan, Chandra A. & Jones, Dylan F. & Menachof, David, 2017. "A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PA), pages 118-133.
    20. Solangi, Yasir Ahmed & Longsheng, Cheng & Shah, Syed Ahsan Ali, 2021. "Assessing and overcoming the renewable energy barriers for sustainable development in Pakistan: An integrated AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 209-222.

    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:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3946-:d:250025. 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.