IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7765-d1142791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy Entropy-SWARA-COPRAS Method for Multi-Criteria Sustainable Biomass Crop Type Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Abbas Mardani

    (Business School, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280, USA)

  • Sarita Devi

    (School of Engineering and Sciences, GD Goenka University, Gurugram 122103, India)

  • Melfi Alrasheedi

    (Department of Quantitative Methods, School of Business, King Faisal University, Hofuf 31982, Saudi Arabia)

  • Leena Arya

    (Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram 522302, India)

  • Mrigendra Pratap Singh

    (Department of Botany, Government College Raigaon, Satna 485441, India)

  • Kiran Pandey

    (Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Technocrat Institute of Technology, Bhopal 462038, India)

Abstract

To select a biomass crop type of the highest sustainability for the purpose of producing biofuel is recognized as a problem of the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) type, as it comprises different conflicting criteria. To effectively address this problem, the present paper introduces a novel integrated approach using the complex proportional assessment (COPRAS) method under the intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs). The proposed approach works based on the IFSs operators as well as an innovative process utilized in evaluating the attributes’ weights. To evaluate these weights, the subjective weights using the step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) model are integrated with the objective weights achieved using an entropy-based approach in order to attain more realistic weights. As MCDA problems inevitably suffer from different degrees of uncertainty, the proposed approach could be of great help to those who are required to make decisions in uncertain settings. The paper took into consideration a sustainable biomass crop selection problem to exemplify the effectiveness of the presented approach in handling real MCDA problems. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis with respect to the diverse values of the attributes is presented in order to assess the stability of the introduced model. This study reveals that the combination of the objective and subjective weights enhances the stability of the introduced approach with diverse attribute weights. Finally, the results of the introduced model are compared to some existing intuitionistic fuzzy information-based methods. The findings of the comparison confirm the efficiency of the present approach in performing the defined tasks under uncertain environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Abbas Mardani & Sarita Devi & Melfi Alrasheedi & Leena Arya & Mrigendra Pratap Singh & Kiran Pandey, 2023. "Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy Entropy-SWARA-COPRAS Method for Multi-Criteria Sustainable Biomass Crop Type Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7765-:d:1142791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7765/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7765/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cobuloglu, Halil I. & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra, 2015. "Food vs. biofuel: An optimization approach to the spatio-temporal analysis of land-use competition and environmental impacts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 418-434.
    2. 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).
    3. Gai-Li Xu & Shu-Ping Wan & Xiao-Lan Xie, 2015. "A Selection Method Based on MAGDM with Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2015, pages 1-13, June.
    4. Abbasi, Tasneem & Abbasi, S.A., 2010. "Biomass energy and the environmental impacts associated with its production and utilization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 919-937, April.
    5. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    6. Ziolkowska, Jadwiga R., 2014. "Optimizing biofuels production in an uncertain decision environment: Conventional vs. advanced technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 366-376.
    7. Mishra, Arunodaya Raj & Mardani, Abbas & Rani, Pratibha & Kamyab, Hesam & Alrasheedi, Melfi, 2021. "A new intuitionistic fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment framework to assess low-carbon sustainable suppliers in the maritime sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    8. Bouraima, Mouhamed Bayane & Qiu, Yanjun & Stević, Željko & Simić, Vladimir, 2023. "Assessment of alternative railway systems for sustainable transportation using an integrated IRN SWARA and IRN CoCoSo model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Zhang, Fengli & Johnson, Dana & Johnson, Mark & Watkins, David & Froese, Robert & Wang, Jinjiang, 2016. "Decision support system integrating GIS with simulation and optimisation for a biofuel supply chain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 740-748.
    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. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Gorelick, David E. & Baskaran, Latha M. & Jager, Henriëtte I., 2019. "Visualizing feedstock siting in biomass production: Tradeoffs between economic and water quality objectives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Bing Yan & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Yuting Huang, 2022. "A Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy Group Decision Framework and Its Application in Urban Rail Transit System Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Umeki, Kentaro & Mousa, Elsayed & Hedayati, Ali & Romar, Henrik & Kemppainen, Antti & Wang, Chuan & Phounglamcheik, Aekjuthon & Tuomikoski, Sari & Norberg, Nicklas & Andefors, Alf , 2018. "Use of biomass in integrated steelmaking – Status quo, future needs and comparison to other low-CO2 steel production technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 384-407.
    5. Zhai, Jihua & Burke, Ian T. & Stewart, Douglas I., 2021. "Beneficial management of biomass combustion ashes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Venn, Tyron J. & Dorries, Jack W. & McGavin, Robert L., 2021. "A mathematical model to support investment in veneer and LVL manufacturing in subtropical eastern Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Weng, Yuwei & Chang, Shiyan & Cai, Wenjia & Wang, Can, 2019. "Exploring the impacts of biofuel expansion on land use change and food security based on a land explicit CGE model: A case study of China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 514-525.
    8. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    9. María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Waste Segregation FMEA Model Integrating Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set and the PAPRIKA Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-29, August.
    10. Wang, Chengchao & Yang, Yusheng & Zhang, Yaoqi, 2012. "Rural household livelihood change, fuelwood substitution, and hilly ecosystem restoration: Evidence from China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2475-2482.
    11. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    12. De Boeck, Kim & Decouttere, Catherine & Jónasson, Jónas Oddur & Vandaele, Nico, 2022. "Vaccine supply chains in resource-limited settings: Mitigating the impact of rainy season disruptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(1), pages 300-317.
    13. Haji Esmaeili, Seyed Ali & Szmerekovsky, Joseph & Sobhani, Ahmad & Dybing, Alan & Peterson, Tim O., 2020. "Sustainable biomass supply chain network design with biomass switching incentives for first-generation bioethanol producers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    14. Saidur, R. & Abdelaziz, E.A. & Demirbas, A. & Hossain, M.S. & Mekhilef, S., 2011. "A review on biomass as a fuel for boilers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 2262-2289, June.
    15. Francis Chinweuba Eboh & Peter Ahlström & Tobias Richards, 2017. "Exergy Analysis of Solid Fuel-Fired Heat and Power Plants: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-29, February.
    16. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    17. Gawlik Remigiusz & Głuszak Michał & Małkowska Agnieszka, 2017. "The Measurement of Housing Preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 31-43, June.
    18. Witold Torbacki, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Model Combining DANP and PROMETHEE II Methods for the Assessment of Cybersecurity in Industry 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-35, August.
    19. Jaros³aw Brodny & Magdalena Tutak, 2023. "The level of implementing sustainable development goal "Industry, innovation and infrastructure" of Agenda 2030 in the European Union countries: Application of MCDM methods," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 14(1), pages 47-102, March.
    20. Holmatov, B. & Hoekstra, A.Y. & Krol, M.S., 2019. "Land, water and carbon footprints of circular bioenergy production systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 224-235.

    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:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7765-:d:1142791. 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.