IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6135-d818351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Ferry Operator Selection: A Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Huibing Cheng

    (School of Management, Jinan University, 601 Huangpu Avenue West, Guangzhou 510632, China
    School Transportation and Logistics, Guangzhou Railway Polytechnic, 100 Qinglong Middle Road, Guangzhou 510430, China)

  • Shanshui Zheng

    (School Transportation and Logistics, Guangzhou Railway Polytechnic, 100 Qinglong Middle Road, Guangzhou 510430, China)

  • Jianghong Feng

    (School of Management, Jinan University, 601 Huangpu Avenue West, Guangzhou 510632, China)

Abstract

This study is motivated by the Zhuhai municipal government, which needs to select a sustainable ferry operator. Previous research has ignored the evaluation and selection of ferry operators. In addition, since ferry operator evaluation involves conflicting qualitative and quantitative criteria, and there may be uncertainty and ambiguity in the evaluation of criteria by experts, a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach is required to address this challenge. To this end, this paper proposes an integrated MCDM framework model to evaluate and select the best ferry operator. First, a ferry operator evaluation index system with 15 sub-criteria is constructed according to literature and expert opinions; then the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) is used to determine the subjective weight of the criteria, and the entropy weight (EW) method is used to calculate the objective weight of the criteria. We use the linear weighting method to obtain the comprehensive weights of the criteria; finally, the fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (FTOPSIS) method is adapted to determine the best ranking of the alternatives. This paper takes the Wanshan Islands in Zhuhai as a real case study to verify the proposed FAHP-EW-FTOPSIS method. The results show that the proposed method can be effectively applied to the evaluation and selection of ferry operators. Sensitivity analysis of criteria weights demonstrates the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed framework model. Key findings based on the research provide management insights that can benefit relevant stakeholders. This is the first paper to study the evaluation and selection of ferry operators. Hence, the evaluation index system and integrated framework model proposed in this paper can make important contributions to the evaluation of ferry operators.

Suggested Citation

  • Huibing Cheng & Shanshui Zheng & Jianghong Feng, 2022. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Ferry Operator Selection: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6135-:d:818351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6135/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6135/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lazim ABDULLAH & Nurhanadia WAHAB, 2010. "A Fuzzy Decision Making Approach In Evaluating Ferry Service Quality," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2(1), pages 94-107, March.
    2. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Valentinas Podvezko, 2016. "Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 267-283, March.
    3. Joohwan Kim & Hwayoung Kim, 2021. "Evaluation of the Efficiency of Maritime Transport Using a Network Slacks-Based Measure (SBM) Approach: A Case Study on the Korean Coastal Ferry Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Zafar Husain & Annayath Maqbool & Abid Haleem & R. D. Pathak & Danny Samson, 2021. "Analyzing the business models for circular economy implementation: a fuzzy TOPSIS approach," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 256-271, December.
    5. Sen Guo & Wenyue Zhang & Xiao Gao, 2020. "Business Risk Evaluation of Electricity Retail Company in China Using a Hybrid MCDM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K. & Yadav, S.S. & Kumar, Gaurav, 2021. "MCDM and GIS based modelling technique for assessment of solar and wind farm locations in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 865-884.
    7. Narayanamoorthy, Samayan & Ramya, L. & Kalaiselvan, Samayan & Kureethara, Joseph Varghese & Kang, Daekook, 2021. "Use of DEMATEL and COPRAS method to select best alternative fuel for control of impact of greenhouse gas emissions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    8. Kahraman, Cengiz & Ertay, Tijen & Buyukozkan, Gulcin, 2006. "A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(2), pages 390-411, June.
    9. Li, Zhao & Luo, Zujiang & Wang, Yan & Fan, Guanyu & Zhang, Jianmang, 2022. "Suitability evaluation system for the shallow geothermal energy implementation in region by Entropy Weight Method and TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 564-576.
    10. Xianghua Chu & Saijun Shao & Su Xiu Xu & Kai Kang, 2020. "Data-driven ferry network design with candidate service arcs: the case of Zhuhai Islands in China," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(5), pages 598-614, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Aslaksen, Ingvild Eide & Svanberg, Elisabeth & Fagerholt, Kjetil & Johnsen, Lennart C. & Meisel, Frank, 2021. "A combined dial-a-ride and fixed schedule ferry service for coastal cities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 306-325.
    13. Seyedeh Leila RazaviToosi & J. M. V. Samani, 2019. "A Fuzzy Group Decision Making Framework Based on ISM-FANP-FTOPSIS for Evaluating Watershed Management Strategies," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(15), pages 5169-5190, December.
    14. Mohammed, Ahmed & Harris, Irina & Govindan, Kannan, 2019. "A hybrid MCDM-FMOO approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 171-184.
    15. Lo, Hong K. & An, Kun & Lin, Wei-hua, 2013. "Ferry service network design under demand uncertainty," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 48-70.
    16. Huang, Wencheng & Shuai, Bin & Sun, Yan & Wang, Yang & Antwi, Eric, 2018. "Using entropy-TOPSIS method to evaluate urban rail transit system operation performance: The China case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 292-303.
    17. Sabriye Topal & Emine Atasoylu, 2022. "A Fuzzy Risk Assessment Model for Small Scale Construction Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    18. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    19. Zhao, Haoran & Guo, Sen & Zhao, Huiru, 2019. "Comprehensive assessment for battery energy storage systems based on fuzzy-MCDM considering risk preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 450-461.
    20. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    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. Hong Li & Zilin Chen, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Framework to Assess the Sustainable Development of Schools within a University: Application to a Chinese University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-12, August.

    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. Jingyuan Shi & Jiaqing Sun, 2023. "Prefabrication Implementation Potential Evaluation in Rural Housing Based on Entropy Weighted TOPSIS Model: A Case Study of Counties in Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Jafarian, Ahmad & Rabiee, Meysam & Tavana, Madjid, 2020. "A novel multi-objective co-evolutionary approach for supply chain gap analysis with consideration of uncertainties," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Manirathinam, Thangaraj & Narayanamoorthy, Samayan & Geetha, Selvaraj & Othman, Mohd Fairuz Iskandar & Alotaibi, Badr Saad & Ahmadian, Ali & Kang, Daekook, 2023. "Sustainable renewable energy system selection for self-sufficient households using integrated fermatean neutrosophic fuzzy stratified AHP-MARCOS approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    4. Rachna, & Singh, Amit Kumar, 2024. "Analyzing policy interventions to stimulate suitable energy sources for the most polluted states of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Moghaddam, Hossein Azizi & Shorabeh, Saman Nadizadeh, 2022. "Designing and implementing a location-based model to identify areas suitable for multi-renewable energy development for supplying electricity to agricultural wells," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 1251-1264.
    6. Elkadeem, Mohamed R. & Younes, Ali & Mazzeo, Domenico & Jurasz, Jakub & Elia Campana, Pietro & Sharshir, Swellam W. & Alaam, Mohamed A., 2022. "Geospatial-assisted multi-criterion analysis of solar and wind power geographical-technical-economic potential assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    7. R. Krishankumar & P. P. Amritha & K. S. Ravichandran, 2022. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: An integrated fuzzy decision model for prioritization of barriers affecting sustainability adoption within supply chains under unknown weight context," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1010-1027, December.
    8. Rahadian Dadan & Firli Anisah & Dinçer Hasan & Yüksel Serhat & Hacıoğlu Ümit & Gherghina Ştefan Cristian & Aksoy Tamer, 2023. "An Evaluation of E7 Countries’ Sustainable Energy Investments: A Decision-Making Approach with Spherical Fuzzy Sets," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, January.
    9. Yevang Nhiavue & Han Soo Lee & Sylvester William Chisale & Jonathan Salar Cabrera, 2022. "Prioritization of Renewable Energy for Sustainable Electricity Generation and an Assessment of Floating Photovoltaic Potential in Lao PDR," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-20, November.
    10. Khan, Feroz & Ali, Yousaf, 2022. "Moving towards a sustainable circular bio-economy in the agriculture sector of a developing country," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Yana Duan & Yang Sun & Yu Zhang & Xiaoqi Fan & Qinghuan Dong & Sen Guo, 2021. "Risk Evaluation of Electric Power Grid Investment in China Employing a Hybrid Novel MCDM Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-22, February.
    12. Xian Huang & Wentong Ji & Xiaorong Ye & Zhangjie Feng, 2023. "Configuration Planning of Expressway Self-Consistent Energy System Based on Multi-Objective Chance-Constrained Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Dimitra G. Vagiona, 2021. "Comparative Multicriteria Analysis Methods for Ranking Sites for Solar Farm Deployment: A Case Study in Greece," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    14. Zehba Raizah & Udaya Kumara Kodipalya Nanjappa & Harshitha Urs Ajjipura Shankar & Umair Khan & Sayed M. Eldin & Rajesh Kumar & Ahmed M. Galal, 2022. "Windmill Global Sourcing in an Initiative Using a Spherical Fuzzy Multiple-Criteria Decision Prototype," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-13, October.
    15. Weng Hoe Lam & Weng Siew Lam & Kah Fai Liew & Pei Fun Lee, 2023. "Decision Analysis on the Financial Performance of Companies Using Integrated Entropy-Fuzzy TOPSIS Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    16. M, Jisma & Mohan, Vivek & Thomas, Mini Shaji & Madhu M, Nimal, 2022. "Risk-Calibrated conventional-renewable generation mix using master-slave portfolio approach guided by flexible investor preferencing," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    17. Prabha Bhola & Alexandros-Georgios Chronis & Panos Kotsampopoulos & Nikos Hatziargyriou, 2023. "Business Model Selection for Community Energy Storage: A Multi Criteria Decision Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-30, September.
    18. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    19. Asadi, Meysam & Ramezanzade, Mohsen & Pourhossein, Kazem, 2023. "A global evaluation model applied to wind power plant site selection," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    20. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.

    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:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6135-:d:818351. 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.