IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i11p5007-d1667730.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review of Implementing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Approaches for the Circular Economy and Cost Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Tighnavard Balasbaneh

    (LSBU Business School, London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London SE1 0AA, UK)

  • Silvio Aldrovandi

    (LSBU Business School, London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London SE1 0AA, UK)

  • Willy Sher

    (School of Architecture and Built Environment, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, The University of Newcastle (UON), University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia)

Abstract

This study advances circular economy initiatives by advocating for the use of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM). MCDM methods address the complex multi-faceted aspects of a product or process. They enable conflicting calculations of energy, cost, environmental criteria, and payback periods to be balanced. A systematic critical systematic review and bibliometric analysis were conducted to investigate the contribution of MCDM to the circular economy. The Scopus database was the primary data source reviewed. The geographical distribution, main research sources, and keyword co-occurrences were analyzed across 31 peer-reviewed book chapters, conference papers, and journal articles. The journal Sustainability (Switzerland) had the most publications (4), followed by the Journal of Business Strategy and the Environment and the Journal of Cleaner Production, each with two articles. Recently MCDM has gained popularity as a tool for evaluating the circular economy. This growing interest may be attributed to the complexity of the circular economy, as MCDM effectively balances multiple environmental criteria while integrating evaluations of economic cost and social impact. Criteria are incommensurable as each criterion has a distinct unit of measurement, making it impossible to compare outcomes across different indicators. MCDM is thus an ideal technique for assessing different options by integrating criteria within testable frameworks. However, no established patterns for selecting specific MCDM methods were identified. This is despite some options (e.g., combinations of AHP and TOPSIS) being used more frequently than others. In conclusion, all the studies identified financial factors as the most significant or highly sensitive issue in the transition toward a circular economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Tighnavard Balasbaneh & Silvio Aldrovandi & Willy Sher, 2025. "A Systematic Review of Implementing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Approaches for the Circular Economy and Cost Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-24, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:5007-:d:1667730
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/5007/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/5007/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:17:y:2025:i:11:p:5007-:d:1667730. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.