Multi-actor multi-criteria sustainability assessment framework for energy and industrial systems in life cycle perspective under uncertainties. Part 1: weighting method

PurposeLife cycle sustainability assessment is meaningful for the decision-makers/stakeholders to select the most sustainable option among multiple alternatives; however, there are usually various severe uncertainty problems in sustainability-oriented decision-making, i.e., the vagueness and ambiguity that existed in human judgments and the lack of information. This study aims at developing a novel life cycle multi-criteria sustainability assessment method for helping the decision-makers/stakeholders to determine the sustainability level of the industrial and energy systems. In part 1, an improved interval analytic hierarchy process (AHP) which allows multiple decision-makers/stakeholders to participate in the decision-making was developed to determine the weights of the criteria which were used in life cycle sustainability assessment.MethodsIt is usually difficult for the decision-makers/stakeholders to use the numbers from 1 to 9 and their reciprocals for determining the comparison matrix when using the traditional AHP method for weight calculation, because human judgments usually involve various uncertainties. In order to the overcome this weak point of the traditional AHP, an improved AHP, so-called interval AHP, in which, multiple decision-makers/stakeholders are allowed to participate in the decision-making and allowed to use interval numbers instead of crisp numbers to establish the comparison matrix for determining the weights of the criteria for life cycle sustainability assessment, has been developed.Results and discussionThe proposed method was used to determine the weights of the four aspects for life cycle sustainability assessment including economic, safety, social, and environmental aspects. Five representative stakeholders were invited to participate in the decision-making. After Monte Carlo simulation, the final weights of the four aspects have been determined with the proposed interval AHP.Conclusions and perspectivesAn interval AHP method was developed for determining the weights of the criteria for life cycle sustainability assessment; the decision-makers are allowed to use interval numbers to establish the comparison matrix for weight calculation. The weighting coefficients determined by Monte Carlo method can accurately reflect the preferences and willingness of multi-actor comparing with the traditional AHP method. This paper merely presents a novel method to calculate the weights of the criteria for life cycle sustainability assessment, but the method for determining the sustainability performance has been presented in part 2.

[1]  T. L. Saaty.  Exploring the interface between hierarchies, multiple objectives and fuzzy sets , 1978 .

[2]  Günter Wozny,et al.  A Modular Approach to Sustainability Assessment and Decision Support in Chemical Process Design , 2010 .

[3]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Hydrogen economy in China: Strengths–weaknesses–opportunities–threats analysis and strategies prioritization , 2015 .

[4]  Ming-Lung Hung,et al.  Quantifying system uncertainty of life cycle assessment based on Monte Carlo simulation , 2008 .

[5]  Pu Li,et al.  A Hybrid Stochastic-Interval Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach for Prioritizing the Strategies of Reusing Treated Wastewater , 2013 .

[6]  Alvin B. Culaba,et al.  A diagnostic model for green productivity assessment of manufacturing processes , 2004 .

[7]  Tsuen-Ho Hsu,et al.  Application of Monte Carlo AHP in ranking dental quality attributes , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[8]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Sustainability of hydrogen supply chain. Part II: Prioritizing and classifying the sustainability of hydrogen supply chains based on the combination of extension theory and AHP , 2013 .

[9]  Farideh Atabi,et al.  The Integrated Fuzzy AHP and Goal Programing Model Based on LCA Results for Industrial Waste Management by Using the Nearest Weighted Approximation of FN: Aluminum Industry in Arak, Iran , 2016 .

[10]  J. Antony,et al.  Modified analytic hierarchy process to incorporate uncertainty and managerial aspects , 2004 .

[11]  Marko Bohanec,et al.  A multi-criteria decision-making model for classifying wood products with respect to their impact on environment , 2010 .

[12]  Louise Deschênes,et al.  Development of weighting factors in the context of LCIA , 2006 .

[13]  S. H. Zanakis,et al.  A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP , 1997 .

[14]  Rehan Sadiq,et al.  AHP based life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) framework: a case study of six storey wood frame and concrete frame buildings in Vancouver , 2015 .

[15]  Rehan Sadiq,et al.  Sustainability assessment of flooring systems in the city of Tehran: An AHP-based life cycle analysis , 2011 .

[16]  R. W. Saaty,et al.  The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used , 1987 .

[17]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Optimization of emergy sustainability index for biodiesel supply network design , 2015 .

[18]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Viability of hydrogen pathways that enhance energy security: A comparison of China and Denmark , 2014 .

[19]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Enhancing China's energy security: determining influential factors and effective strategic measures , 2014 .

[20]  Yinlun Huang,et al.  Multistage Optimization for Chemical Process Sustainability Enhancement under Uncertainty , 2016 .

[21]  David J. Brennan,et al.  Application of data quality assessment methods to an LCA of electricity generation , 2003 .

[22]  Edit Adamcsek,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process and its Generalizations , 2008 .

[23]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[24]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Integration of water footprint accounting and costs for optimal chemical pulp supply mix in paper industry , 2014 .

[25]  Chunyu Ng,et al.  An evidential reasoning-based AHP approach for the selection of environmentally-friendly designs , 2016 .

[26]  Youyin Jing,et al.  Applying LCA and fuzzy AHP to evaluate building energy conservation , 2011 .

[27]  Hing Kai Chan,et al.  An Extended Fuzzy-AHP Approach for the Evaluation of Green Product Designs , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[28]  Fabio De Felice,et al.  Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC) analysis model for a stand-alone hybrid renewable energy system , 2016 .

[29]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Sustainability, shale gas, and energy transition in China: assessing barriers and prioritizing strategic measures , 2015 .

[30]  David L. McCleese,et al.  Using monte carlo simulation in life cycle assessment for electric and internal combustion vehicles , 2002 .

[31]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Measurements study on sustainability of China's mining cities , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[32]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages , 1994 .