IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p7816-d848791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Circular Supplier Selection in the Power Battery Industry Using a Linguistic T-Spherical Fuzzy MAGDM Model Based on the Improved ARAS Method

Author

Listed:
  • Haolun Wang

    (Research Center of the Central China for Economic and Social Development, Nanchang 330031, China
    School of Economics and Management, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China)

Abstract

In the power battery industry, the selection of an appropriate sustainable recycling supplier (SCS) is a significant topic in circular supply chain management. Evaluating and selecting a SCS for spent power batteries is considered a complex multi-attribute group decision-making (MAGDM) problem closely related to the environment, economy, and society. The linguistic T-spherical fuzzy (Lt-SF) set (Lt-SFS) is a combination of a linguistic term set and a T-spherical fuzzy set (T-SFS), which can accurately describe vague cognition of human and uncertain environments. Therefore, this article proposes a group decision-making methodology for a SCS selection based on the improved additive ratio assessment (ARAS) in the Lt-SFS context. This paper extends the Lt-SF generalized distance measure and defines the Lt-SF similarity measure. The Lt-SF Heronian mean (Lt-SFHM) operator and its weighted form (i.e., Lt-SFWHM) were developed. Subsequently, a new Lt-SF MAGDM model was constructed by integrating the LT-SFWHM operator, generalized distance measure, and ARAS method. In it, the expert weight on the attribute was determined based on the similarity measure, using the generalized distance measure to obtain the objective attribute weight and then the combined attribute weight. Finally, a real case of SCS selection in the power battery industry is presented for demonstration. The effectiveness and practicability of this method were verified through a sensitivity analysis and a comparative study with the existing methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Haolun Wang, 2022. "Sustainable Circular Supplier Selection in the Power Battery Industry Using a Linguistic T-Spherical Fuzzy MAGDM Model Based on the Improved ARAS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-26, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7816-:d:848791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7816/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7816/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abid Haleem & Shahbaz Khan & Sunil Luthra & Harshit Varshney & Musaib Alam & Mohd Imran Khan, 2021. "Supplier evaluation in the context of circular economy: A forward step for resilient business and environment concern," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 2119-2146, May.
    2. Ferrer, Geraldo & Ayres, Robert U., 2000. "The impact of remanufacturing in the economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 413-429, March.
    3. Xiongyong Zhou & Zhiduan Xu, 2018. "An Integrated Sustainable Supplier Selection Approach Based on Hybrid Information Aggregation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-49, July.
    4. Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "A Hesitant Fuzzy Combined Compromise Solution Framework-Based on Discrimination Measure for Ranking Sustainable Third-Party Reverse Logistic Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Morteza Yazdani & Pascale Zaraté & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems," Post-Print hal-02879091, HAL.
    6. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    7. Stanislav Shmelev & Harrison Roger Brook, 2021. "Macro Sustainability across Countries: Key Sector Environmentally Extended Input-Output Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-46, October.
    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. Ömer Karakoç & Samet Memiş & Bahar Sennaroglu, 2023. "A Review of Sustainable Supplier Selection with Decision-Making Methods from 2018 to 2022," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, December.

    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. Haolun Wang & Faming Zhang & Kifayat Ullah, 2022. "Waste Clothing Recycling Channel Selection Using a CoCoSo-D Method Based on Sine Trigonometric Interaction Operational Laws with Pythagorean Fuzzy Information," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-28, March.
    2. Mališa Žižović & Dragan Pamučar & Miloljub Albijanić & Prasenjit Chatterjee & Ivan Pribićević, 2020. "Eliminating Rank Reversal Problem Using a New Multi-Attribute Model—The RAFSI Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Sindhwani, Rahul & Singh, Punj Lata & Behl, Abhishek & Afridi, Mohd. Shayan & Sammanit, Debaroti & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2022. "Modeling the critical success factors of implementing net zero emission (NZE) and promoting resilience and social value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    4. Sindhwani, Rahul & Afridi, Shayan & Kumar, Anil & Banaitis, Audrius & Luthra, Sunil & Singh, Punj Lata, 2022. "Can industry 5.0 revolutionize the wave of resilience and social value creation? A multi-criteria framework to analyze enablers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    5. Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha & Jalil Heidary-Dahooie & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė & Kannan Govindan, 2022. "A new dynamic multi-attribute decision making method based on Markov chain and linear assignment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 159-191, August.
    6. Patchara Phochanikorn & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "A New Extension to a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Sustainable Supplier Selection under an Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, September.
    7. Miguel Ortíz-Barrios & Natalia Jaramillo-Rueda & Muhammet Gul & Melih Yucesan & Genett Jiménez-Delgado & Juan-José Alfaro-Saíz, 2023. "A Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Approach for Assessing the Emergency Department Performance during the COVID-19 Outbreak," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-39, March.
    8. Sayyid Ali Banihashemi & Mohammad Khalilzadeh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene, 2021. "Investigating the Environmental Impacts of Construction Projects in Time-Cost Trade-Off Project Scheduling Problems with CoCoSo Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Morteza Yazdani & Dragan Pamucar & Prasenjit Chatterjee & Ali Ebadi Torkayesh, 2022. "“A multi-tier sustainable food supplier selection model under uncertainty”," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 116-145, June.
    10. Pratibha Rani & Jabir Ali & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "An Integrated Single-Valued Neutrosophic Combined Compromise Solution Methodology for Renewable Energy Resource Selection Problem," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, July.
    11. N. Aktaş & N. Demirel, 2021. "A hybrid framework for evaluating corporate sustainability using multi-criteria decision making," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 15591-15618, October.
    12. Yongming Song & Jun Hu, 2017. "Vector similarity measures of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    14. Taelim Choi & Randall W. Jackson & Nancey Green Leigh & Christa D. Jensen, 2011. "A Baseline Input—Output Model with Environmental Accounts (IOEA) Applied to E-Waste Recycling," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 34(1), pages 3-33, January.
    15. Zheng, Guozhong & Wang, Xiao, 2020. "The comprehensive evaluation of renewable energy system schemes in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    16. 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).
    17. Milad Zamanifar & Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseyni, 2017. "Recovery planning model for roadways network after natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 699-716, June.
    18. Pedro Ponce & Citlaly Pérez & Aminah Robinson Fayek & Arturo Molina, 2022. "Solar Energy Implementation in Manufacturing Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Fuzzy TOPSIS and S4 Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Mohit Jain & Gunjan Soni & Deepak Verma & Rajendra Baraiya & Bharti Ramtiyal, 2023. "Selection of Technology Acceptance Model for Adoption of Industry 4.0 Technologies in Agri-Fresh Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.

    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:13:p:7816-:d:848791. 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.