Sustainable decision-making using the COMET method: An empirical study of the ammonium nitrate transport management

This paper investigates the problem of the sustainable ammonium nitrate transport. The significance of this problem is increasing, considered the occurrence of the worldwide agricultural production boost. The existing international regulations for the transport of the dangerous chemical substances are not sufficient to obtain a satisfactory solution for the sustainable transport. The main reason for that is the fact that the safety criteria can easily become dominated by the economic factors. In this paper, the authors use the COMET method to identify a decision making model for the selection of the best scenario of sustainable transport. The COMET method is a new multi-criteria decision-making technique that is free of the rank reversal phenomenon. The identified model provides information about the global and local significance level of each of the criteria. The proposed approach can be easily expanded by using a greater number of criteria, depending on the particular problem analyzed. The proposed methodology is an efficient and highly accurate solution to make decisions based on experts' knowledge.

[1]  B. Roy,et al.  The European school of MCDA: Emergence, basic features and current works , 1996 .

[2]  Andrzej Piegat,et al.  Identification of a Multicriteria Decision-Making Model Using the Characteristic Objects Method , 2014, Appl. Comput. Intell. Soft Comput..

[3]  G. Munda.  Multicriteria Evaluation in a Fuzzy Environment: Theory and Applications in Ecological Economics , 1995 .

[4]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .

[5]  O. Bayazit.  Use of analytic network process in vendor selection decisions , 2006 .

[6]  S. K. Goyal,et al.  A multi-criteria decision making approach for location planning for urban distribution centers under uncertainty , 2011, Math. Comput. Model..

[7]  W. D. Keyser,et al.  Argus — A New Multiple Criteria Method Based on the General Idea of Outranking , 1994 .

[8]  Laurence Turcksin,et al.  Multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to support sustainable decisions: State of use , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[9]  Suhaiza Hanim Binti Dato Mohamad Zailani,et al.  Green decision-making model in reverse logistics using FUZZY-VIKOR method , 2015 .

[10]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  The Regime Method: A New Multicriteria Technique , 1983 .

[11]  Selin Soner Kara,et al.  Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[12]  Benedetto Matarazzo,et al.  Other Outranking Approaches , 2005 .

[13]  T. Saaty.  The Analytic Network Process , 2001 .

[14]  Carlos A. Bana e Costa,et al.  MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique) , 2011 .

[15]  W. Sałabun.  Reduction in the Number of Comparisons Required to Create Matrix of Expert Judgment in the Comet Method , 2014 .

[16]  Andrzej Piegat,et al.  Comparative Analysis of MCDM Methods for Assessing the Severity of Chronic Liver Disease , 2015, ICAISC.

[17]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  Reviewing the Use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Evaluation of Transport Projects: Time for a Multi-Actor Approach , 2015 .

[18]  Carlos A. Bana e Costa,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Aid: An Overview , 1990 .

[19]  Alfio Giarlotta,et al.  Passive and Active Compensability Multicriteria ANnalysis (PACMAN) , 1998 .

[20]  H Voogd,et al.  Multicriteria Evaluation with Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Data , 1982 .

[21]  Hing Kai Chan,et al.  A hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS approach to assess improvement areas when implementing green supply chain initiatives , 2013 .

[22]  Wojciech Sałabun,et al.  The Characteristic Objects Method: A New Distance‐based Approach to Multicriteria Decision‐making Problems , 2015 .

[23]  Paolo Ferrari,et al.  A method for choosing from among alternative transportation projects , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[24]  Ravi Shankar,et al.  Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach , 2007 .

[25]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[26]  Wojciech Salabun,et al.  Application of the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method to identify nonlinear decision model , 2014 .

[27]  Jarosław Wątróbski,et al.  The Rank Reversals Paradox in Management Decisions: The Comparison of the AHP and COMET Methods , 2016, KES-IDT.

[28]  Jacques Teghem,et al.  Application of the ORESTE method to a nuclear waste management problem , 1991 .

[29]  Benedetto Matarazzo,et al.  A Pairwise Criterion Comparison Approach: The Mappac and Pragma Methods , 1990 .

[30]  P. Slamka,et al.  Effect of nitrification inhibitors on the content of available nitrogen forms in the soil under maize (Zea mays, L.) growing , 2016 .

[31]  Umut Rifat Tuzkaya,et al.  Evaluating the environmental effects of transportation modes using an integrated methodology and an application , 2009 .

[32]  J. Siskos.  Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making , 1982 .

[33]  Cheng-Wei Lin,et al.  Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation , 2005 .

[34]  Witold Pedrycz,et al.  Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making: Models, Methods and Applications , 2010 .

[35]  Xiaowei Xu,et al.  Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[36]  Micheline Bélanger,et al.  An Automated Explanation Approach for a Decision Support System based on MCDA , 2005, ExaCt.

[37]  Hassan Jafari,et al.  Presenting an Integrative Approach of MAPPAC and FANP and Balanced Scorecard for Performance Measurements of Container Terminals , 2013 .

[38]  Andrzej Piegat,et al.  Fuzzy Modeling and Control , 2001 .

[39]  C. Hwang,et al.  TOPSIS for MODM , 1994 .

[40]  Philippe Fortemps,et al.  Multicriteria Choice and Ranking Using Decision Rules Induced from Rough Approximation of Graded Preference Relations , 2004, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[41]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  A new PCCA method: IDRA , 1997 .

[42]  A. Rizzi,et al.  A fuzzy TOPSIS methodology to support outsourcing of logistics services , 2006 .

[43]  K. Govindan,et al.  A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach , 2013 .

[44]  Jaap Spronk,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Aid/Analysis in Finance , 2005 .

[45]  Miguel Miranda,et al.  Airlines Performance and Eflciency Evaluation using a MCDA Methodology. The Case for Low Cost Carriers vs Legacy Carriers , 2016 .

[46]  Jarosław Wątróbski,et al.  Outline of Multicriteria Decision-making in Green Logistics☆ , 2016 .

[47]  H. Pastijn,et al.  Constructing an outranking relation with ORESTE , 1989 .

[48]  M. Naim,et al.  Decision theory in sustainable supply chain management: a literature review , 2014 .

[49]  E Planas,et al.  A survey of accidents occurring during the transport of hazardous substances by road and rail. , 2006, Journal of hazardous materials.

[50]  Kannan Govindan,et al.  Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review , 2015 .

[51]  J. Paelinck.  Qualiflex: A flexible multiple-criteria method , 1978 .

[52]  Constantin Zopounidis,et al.  The European School of MCDA : Some Recent Trends , 1997 .

[53]  Kim-Leng Poh,et al.  Transportation fuels and policy for Singapore: an AHP planning approach , 1999 .

[54]  José Ramón San Cristóbal Mateo,et al.  Multi-Attribute Utility Theory , 2012 .

[55]  Kannan Govindan,et al.  ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications , 2016, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[56]  Shahzad Faizi,et al.  Decision Making with Uncertainty Using Hesitant Fuzzy Sets , 2017, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.

[57]  Todd Alexander Litman,et al.  Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis Techniques, Estimates and Implications Second Edition (2009) , 2003 .

[58]  Matthias Ehrgott,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys , 2005 .

[59]  João Jardim,et al.  Air Transport Performance and Efficiency: MCDA vs. DEA Approaches☆ , 2014 .

[60]  Robert LIN,et al.  NOTE ON FUZZY SETS , 2014 .

[61]  Veera P. Darji,et al.  Application of AHP/EVAMIX Method for Decision Making in the Industrial Environment , 2013 .

[62]  Alejandro Tudela,et al.  Comparing the output of cost benefit and multi-criteria analysis: An application to urban transport investments , 2006 .

[63]  E. Benzel,et al.  Too Much of a Good Thing? , 2018, World Neurosurgery.

[64]  F. Chan,et al.  Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach , 2007 .

[65]  Timothy J. Ross,et al.  Properties of Membership Functions, Fuzzification, and Defuzzification , 2010 .