MUPOM: A multi-criteria multi-period outranking method for decision-making in sustainable development context

Frini, Anissa; Amor, Sarah Ben

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2018.11.002

Cited by 31 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 164 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In [6], the long-term effects are discounted, and in [4] they are roughly and qualitatively assessed. Very recently, some temporal extensions of MCDA methods have been developed [3,6,[7][8][9][10][11]. In a forest management context, the long-term impacts were addressed as a specific criterion [3], and the local community was asked to evaluate it.…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, we started a research program to develop temporal outranking MCDA methods. In 2019, our research team proposed a generalization of outranking methods to temporal context and show how they can be applied for processing temporal impacts of decisions [7,8]. Frini and Benamor [7] propose the first outranking method for multi-period (temporal) evaluations of actions called MUPOM.…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2019, our research team proposed a generalization of outranking methods to temporal context and show how they can be applied for processing temporal impacts of decisions [7,8]. Frini and Benamor [7] propose the first outranking method for multi-period (temporal) evaluations of actions called MUPOM. Based on pairwise comparisons, outranking relations and a measure of distance between preference relations, MUPOM accommodates the requirements of sustainable development discussed earlier and supports decisions that comply with the long-term vision related to SD context.…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Temporal MCDA Methods for Decision-Making in Sustainable Development Context

Frini¹,

Ben-Amor²,

Urli³

2020

Sustainability Concept in Developing Countries [Working Title]

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public decision-making problems are more and more complex in a context where decisions have to be made based concurrently on economic, social, and environmental considerations. In this context, decisions need to be evaluated in the short, medium, and long term because their planning horizons are usually of several years or even decades. A literature review on MCDA methods used in the sustainable development (SD) context shows that most MCDA methods used are static and existing research does not propose any aggregation framework for temporal assessment of actions. In the last 5 years, development of temporal MCDA has witnessed the interest of some researchers. However, the latest developments remain limited, and only a few research studies offer aggregation frameworks for multi-period settings. This paper presents two recent temporal MCDA methods that were applied in SD context. The first is MUPOM method which demonstrates how outranking methods, based on concordance-discordance principles, can be generalized to processing temporal impacts of decisions. The second, named PROMETHEE-MP, consists of a multi-period generalization of PROMETHEE under random uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Temporal MCDA Methods for Decision-Making in Sustainable Development Context

Frini¹,

Ben-Amor²,

Urli³

2020

Sustainability Concept in Developing Countries [Working Title]

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The relative importances of the criteria and subcriteria are assessed with AHP. Frini and Amor [46] use the MUlti-criteria multi-Period Outranking Method (MUPOM) to select the best compromise sustainable forest management alternative, taking into account environmental impacts, economic benefits, and decision-maker preferences. Thus, it is seen that the methods of analysis and applied techniques vary between studies, although in general complex decision-making techniques are not used, and, especially, those include uncertainty of incomplete information analysis.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Sustainable Development in European Union Countries

Martín

Carnero

2019

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the great importance of sustainable development for a country, it is possible to say, having reviewed the literature widely, that this research is the first to use a Multi-Criteria Decision Method (MCDM) to analyze the sustainability of EU countries, considering different dimensions and weighting the criteria with the help of a group of experts. This paper therefore sets out a Multi-Criteria Model for analyzing the development of sustainability in EU countries (and Norway and Iceland). This required prior filtering and analysis of the data from the Eurostat database. The model was built with the multi-criteria Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique. Four experts in sustainability participated in the weighting process. The results of the AHP model are identified by areas of sustainability, with the highest value found in Norway, and the rest are found around it forming rings of sustainability, where sustainability decreases the further a country is from Norway. This research could be used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each country with regard to sustainable development, and by analyzing the measures taken by Norway and other countries with very high sustainability, by continuous improvement processes, reach similar levels of sustainable development.

show abstract

“…Hajek and Froelich [45] proposed an integrating of OPSIS with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy cognitive maps for effective group decision making. Frini and Ben Amor [46] proposed a temporal outranking method, named MUPOM (MUlti-criteria multi-Period Outranking Method), which accommodates the requirements of sustainable development and demonstrates how the paradigm behind outranking methods can be of use in processing temporal impacts of decisions. The proposed method is structured in four phases: multi-criteria aggregation, temporal aggregation, exploitation and follow-up.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Weight determination and ranking priority in interval group MCDM

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we propose a method to determine the weight of decision makers (DMs) in group multiple criteria decision making (GMCDM) problems with interval data . Here, we obtain an interval weight for each DM and then the relative closeness of each decision from the negative ideal solution (NIS) and the positive ideal solution (PIS) is then computed. In the proposed method, after weighting the decision matrix of each DM, the alternatives are ranked using interval arithmetic. A comparative example along with a real world problem on air quality assessment is given to illustrate our method. Technique (SMART) method [12] which asks for direct ratings on a scale from 0 to 100 and the Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH) method [13] which requires pairwise comparisons on an interval. The other method is ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE) which has different types. It is worthy to mention that the study of Govindan and Jespen [14] is a comprehensive source of ELECTRE and ELECTRE-based methods. Their study considers different types of ELECTRE methods and compares, modifies and defines the area of applications of each method. Recently, Ishizaka and Siraj [15] evaluated AHP, SMART and MAGBETH for a real MCDM problem. The authors investigate whether these three methods really help the DMs or not. The assessment of public transport satisfaction investigated by Nassereddine and Eskandari [16]. For this purpose, the authors employ an integrated MCDM technique. Their method is a combination of Delphi, group AHP (GAHP) and Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE). A method based on TOPSIS and entropy proposed by Abdollahi et al. [17] to rank multifarious Demand Response Resources (DRRs). To be noted that the MCDM models are widely used in systems engineering [18-22].Frankly speaking, most of the above mentioned methods include one DM while real life problems have different managerial, engineering, social and etc. aspects and they usually deal with a group of DMs. Papers such as [23-29] have presented methods to solve GMCDM problems. These methods have considered the cases that data are exact and have crisp values. But, in most real world problems the decision information are expressed as interval or fuzzy numbers [30]. Nowadays, the Fuzzy MCDM (FMCDM) problems play an important role in industrial and system engineering. An extension of fuzzy VIKOR to solve Supplier Selection Problem (SSP) was presented by Mahmoudi et al. [31]. In their method a fuzzy distance measure is proposed to rank the suppliers. Besides, they consider unequal weights for DMs and the performance of each supplier under each criteria is represented by a linguistic variable. Finally the alternatives are ranked using preference ration method. An MCDM problem with stochastic and intuitionistic data was proposed by Hu et al. [32]. The problem of dam site selection was considered as a Group FMCDM (GFMCDM) by Minatour et al. [33]. To solve the problem an integrati...

show abstract

MUPOM: A multi-criteria multi-period outranking method for decision-making in sustainable development context

Cited by 31 publications

References 164 publications

Temporal MCDA Methods for Decision-Making in Sustainable Development Context

Temporal MCDA Methods for Decision-Making in Sustainable Development Context

Evaluation of Sustainable Development in European Union Countries

Weight determination and ranking priority in interval group MCDM

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About