IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i2p303-d90987.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weight Determination of Sustainable Development Indicators Using a Global Sensitivity Analysis Method

Author

Listed:
  • Wenfei Luan

    (Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing of Gansu Province, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
    University of Chinese Academy Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Ling Lu

    (Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing of Gansu Province, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
    Key Laboratory of Inland River Basin Eco hydrology, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Xin Li

    (Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing of Gansu Province, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
    CAS Center for Excellence in Tibetan Plateau Earth Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Chunfeng Ma

    (Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing of Gansu Province, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

Abstract

Sustainable development (SD) evaluations have attracted considerable attention from governments and scientific communities around the world. The objective and quantitative calculation of the importance of sustainable assessment indicators is a key problem in the accurate evaluation of SD. Traditional methods fail to quantify the coupling effects among indicators. This paper presents a weight determination approach based on the global sensitivity analysis algorithm known as the extended Fourier amplitude sensitivity test (EFAST). This method is efficient and robust and is not only able to quantify the sensitivity of the evaluation indictors to the target, but can also quantitatively describe the uncertainties among the indictors. In this paper, we analyze the sensitivity of 18 indicators in a multi-index comprehensive evaluation model and weigh the indicators in the system according to their importance. To verify the feasibility and advantages of this new method, we compare the evaluation result with the traditional entropy method. The comparison shows that the EFAST algorithm can provide greater detail in an SD evaluation. Additionally, the EFAST algorithm is more specific in terms of quantitative analysis and comprehensive aspects and can more effectively distinguish the importance of indicators.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenfei Luan & Ling Lu & Xin Li & Chunfeng Ma, 2017. "Weight Determination of Sustainable Development Indicators Using a Global Sensitivity Analysis Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:303-:d:90987
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/2/303/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/2/303/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karger, Cornelia R. & Hennings, Wilfried, 2009. "Sustainability evaluation of decentralized electricity generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 583-593, April.
    2. Koen Decancq & María Ana Lugo, 2013. "Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 7-34, January.
    3. Morris, David J. & Speirs, Douglas C. & Cameron, Angus I. & Heath, Michael R., 2014. "Global sensitivity analysis of an end-to-end marine ecosystem model of the North Sea: Factors affecting the biomass of fish and benthos," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 273(C), pages 251-263.
    4. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    5. Andriantiatsaholiniaina, Luc A. & Kouikoglou, Vassilis S. & Phillis, Yannis A., 2004. "Evaluating strategies for sustainable development: fuzzy logic reasoning and sensitivity analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 149-172, February.
    6. Moran, Daniel D. & Wackernagel, Mathis & Kitzes, Justin A. & Goldfinger, Steven H. & Boutaud, Aurelien, 2008. "Measuring sustainable development -- Nation by nation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 470-474, January.
    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. Wenfei Luan & Ling Lu & Xin Li & Chunfeng Ma, 2018. "Integrating Extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Test and Set Pair Analysis for Sustainable Development Evaluation from the View of Uncertainty Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Hui Li & Kangyin Dong & Renjin Sun & Jintao Yu & Jinhong Xu, 2017. "Sustainability Assessment of Refining Enterprises Using a DEA-Based Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Yingchun Ge & Xin Li & Ximing Cai & Xiangzheng Deng & Feng Wu & Zhongyuan Li & Wenfei Luan, 2018. "Converting UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to Decision-Making Objectives and Implementation Options at the River Basin Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Feifei Wu & Xiaohua Yang & Bing Lian & Yan Wang & Jing Kang, 2023. "Suitability Evaluation of Human Settlements Using a Global Sensitivity Analysis Method: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, March.

    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. Giovanna Boccuzzo & Licia Maron, 2017. "Proposal of a composite indicator of job quality based on a measure of weighted distances," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 2357-2374, September.
    2. Xu, Xiaozhan, 2004. "A note on the subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 530-532, July.
    3. Mariateresa Ciommi & Chiara Gigliarano & Francesco M. Chelli & Mauro Gallegati, 2022. "It is the Total that Does [Not] Make the Sum: Nature, Economy and Society in the Equitable and Sustainable Well-Being of the Italian Provinces," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 491-522, June.
    4. Funcke, Simon & Bauknecht, Dierk, 2016. "Typology of centralised and decentralised visions for electricity infrastructure," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 67-74.
    5. Kęstutis Biekša & Violeta Valiulė & Ligita Šimanskienė & Raffaele Silvestri, 2022. "Assessment of Sustainable Economic Development in the EU Countries with Reference to the SDGs and Environmental Footprint Indices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Cheng Peng & Xunbo Wu & Yelin Fu & Kin Keung Lai, 2017. "Alternative approaches to constructing composite indicators: an application to construct a Sustainable Energy Index for APEC economies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 747-759, October.
    8. Gaurav Datt, 2019. "Multidimensional poverty in the Philippines, 2004–2013: How much do choices for weighting, identification and aggregation matter?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 1103-1128, October.
    9. Debesh Mishra & Suchismita Satapathy, 2024. "Modified reaper for small-scale farmers: an approach for sustainable agriculture," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1451-1480, January.
    10. repec:qeh:ophiwp:ophiwp038 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Alkire, Sabina & Santos, Maria Emma, 2014. "Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 251-274.
    12. Wietzke, Frank-Borge, 2024. "Perceptions of social class in Africa. Results from a conjoint experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    13. Fusco, Elisa, 2023. "Potential improvements approach in composite indicators construction: The Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Khatab Alqararah, 2023. "Assessing the robustness of composite indicators: the case of the Global Innovation Index," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Nikos Chatzistamoulou & Phoebe Koundouri, 2020. "The Economics of Sustainable Development," DEOS Working Papers 2005, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    16. Renata Pelissari & Sarah Ben Amor & Álvaro Oliveira D’Antona & Eduardo José Marandola Júnior & Leonardo Tomazeli Duarte, 2024. "A semi-supervised multi-criteria sorting approach to constructing social vulnerability composite indicators," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 337(1), pages 235-260, June.
    17. Dutta, Indranil & Nogales, Ricardo & Yalonetzky, Gaston, 2021. "Endogenous weights and multidimensional poverty: A cautionary tale," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Marko Ledić & Ivica Rubil, 2021. "Beyond Wage Gap, Towards Job Quality Gap: The Role of Inter-Group Differences in Wages, Non-Wage Job Dimensions, and Preferences," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 523-561, June.
    19. Giulia Greco, 2018. "Setting the Weights: The Women’s Capabilities Index for Malawi," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 457-478, January.
    20. Sabina Alkire & James Foster, 2011. "Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 289-314, June.
    21. Espinoza-Delgado, José & López-Laborda, Julio, 2017. "Nicaragua: evolución de la pobreza multidimensional, 2001-2009," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:9:y:2017:i:2:p:303-:d:90987. 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.