IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i3p377-d92190.html

Environmentally Friendly Supplier Selection Using Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Wei Song

    (School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, No. 2 Taibai South Street, Xi’an 710071, China)

  • Zhiya Chen

    (School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, No. 2 Taibai South Street, Xi’an 710071, China)

  • Xuping Wang

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

  • Qian Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, No. 2 Taibai South Street, Xi’an 710071, China)

  • Chenghua Shi

    (School of Economics and Management, Hebei University of Engineering, No. 199, Guangming South Street, Handan 056038, China)

  • Wei Zhao

    (School of Computer, Xidian University, No. 2 Taibai South Street, Xi’an 710071, China)

Abstract

This paper proposes an optimal selection method to address the real-world problem of environmentally friendly supplier selection, based on prospect theory. This study adopted the manufacturer’s point of view, and considered the manufacturer’s psychological and behavioral factors in the process of choosing suppliers. The first step was to build supplier-selection indexes for manufacturers. Then, the study assessed the attribute of manufacturer expectations as a reference point. Next, index gains and losses were evaluated against the expectation reference point, yielding a payoff matrix and loss matrix. Finally, the study used prospect theory to calculate the comprehensive prospect value of each supplier; comprehensive prospect values were sorted in descending order to help manufacturers make the best choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Wei Song & Zhiya Chen & Xuping Wang & Qian Wang & Chenghua Shi & Wei Zhao, 2017. "Environmentally Friendly Supplier Selection Using Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:377-:d:92190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/3/377/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/3/377/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chih-Chao Chung & Li-Chung Chao & Shi-Jer Lou, 2016. "The Establishment of a Green Supplier Selection and Guidance Mechanism with the ANP and IPA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Deborah Minehart & Zvika Neeman, 1999. "Termination and Coordination in Partnerships," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 191-221, June.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    4. Shiromaru, Isao & Inuiguchi, Masahiro & Sakawa, Masatoshi, 2000. "A fuzzy satisficing method for electric power plant coal purchase using genetic algorithms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 218-230, October.
    5. J.H. Ruan & X.P. Wang & F.T.S. Chan & Y. Shi, 2016. "Optimizing the intermodal transportation of emergency medical supplies using balanced fuzzy clustering," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(14), pages 4368-4386, July.
    6. Aijun Liu & John Fowler & Michele Pfund, 2016. "Dynamic co-ordinated scheduling in the supply chain considering flexible routes," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 322-335, January.
    7. Degraeve, Zeger & Labro, Eva & Roodhooft, Filip, 2004. "Total cost of ownership purchasing of a service: The case of airline selection at Alcatel Bell," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 23-40, July.
    8. Junhu Ruan & Felix T. S. Chan & Fangwei Zhu & Xuping Wang & Jing Yang, 2016. "A Visualization Review of Cloud Computing Algorithms in the Last Decade," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    9. Ghodsypour, S. H. & O'Brien, C., 2001. "The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraint," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 15-27, August.
    10. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
    11. Li, Dong & Nagurney, Anna, 2015. "A general multitiered supply chain network model of quality competition with suppliers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PA), pages 336-356.
    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. Patchara Phochanikorn & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model Based on Prospect Theory for Green Supplier Selection under Uncertain Environment: A Case Study of the Thailand Palm Oil Products Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Jian-Peng Chang & Heng-Xin Ren & Luis Martínez & Witold Pedrycz & Zhen-Song Chen, 2024. "Requirement-driven supplier selection: a multi-criteria QFD-based approach under epistemic and stochastic uncertainties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(2), pages 1079-1128, November.

    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. Wei Song & Zhiya Chen & Aijun Liu & Qiuyun Zhu & Wei Zhao & Sang-Bing Tsai & Hui Lu, 2018. "A Study on Green Supplier Selection in Dynamic Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.
    3. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    4. Olivier Chanel & Graciela Chichilnisky, 2009. "The influence of fear in decisions: Experimental evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 271-298, December.
    5. Diecidue, Enrico & Wakker, Peter P., 2002. "Dutch books: avoiding strategic and dynamic complications, and a comonotonic extension," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 135-149, March.
    6. Abdellaoui, Mohammed & Bleichrodt, Han, 2007. "Eliciting Gul's theory of disappointment aversion by the tradeoff method," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 631-645, December.
    7. Joost M. E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2003. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1251-1263, September.
    8. Victor Gonzalez-Jimenez & Patricio S. Dalton & Charles N. Noussair, 2019. "The Dark Side of Monetary Bonuses: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Vienna Economics Papers vie1909, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    9. Wang, Di, 2021. "Attention-driven probability weighting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    10. Oliver, Adam, 2003. "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 159, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    12. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    13. Víctor González-Jiménez, 2021. "Incentive contracts when agents distort probabilities," Vienna Economics Papers vie2101, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    14. Bouchouicha, Ranoua & Martinsson, Peter & Medhin, Haileselassie & Vieider, Ferdinand M., 2017. "Stake effects on ambiguity attitudes for gains and losses," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 83(1), pages 19-35.
    15. Glimcher, Paul W. & Tymula, Agnieszka A., 2023. "Expected subjective value theory (ESVT): A representation of decision under risk and certainty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 110-128.
    16. Jou, Rong-Chang & Chen, Ke-Hong, 2013. "An application of cumulative prospect theory to freeway drivers’ route choice behaviours," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 123-131.
    17. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2016. "An elicitation of utility for quality of life under prospect theory," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 121-134.
    18. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    19. Narges Hajimoladarvish, 2017. "Very Low Probabilities in the Loss Domain," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, Springer;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 42(1), pages 41-58, March.
    20. Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M. & Cuilty, Emilio, 2014. "The role of emotions on risk aversion: A Prospect Theory experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-9.

    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:3:p:377-:d:92190. 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.