Environmental sustainability benchmarking of the U.S. and Canada metropoles: An expert judgment-based multi-criteria decision making approach

Cities

Volumn 42, Issue PA, 2015, Pages 31-41

  Egilmez, Gokhan ^a   Gumus, Serkan ^b   Kucukvar, Murat ^c  

^a North Dakota State University   (United States)

^b TURKISH MILITARY ACADEMY   (Turkey)

^c ISTANBUL SEHIR UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Intuitionistic fuzzy transformation; Multi criteria decision making; Sustainability benchmarking; Sustainable city; U.S. and Canada metropoles

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907757534     PISSN: 02642751     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2014.08.006     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. AbuSada J., Thawaba S. Multi criteria analysis for locating sustainable suburban centers: A case study from Ramallah Governorate, Palestine. Cities 2011, 28(5):381-393.
2. Achillas C., Vlachokostas C., Moussiopoulos N., Banias G. Prioritize strategies to confront environmental deterioration in urban areas: Multicriteria assessment of public opinion and experts' views. Cities 2011, 28(5):414-423.
3. Akadiri P.O., Olomolaiye P.O., Chinyio E.A. Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects. Automation in Construction 2013, 30(null):113-125.
4. Atanassov K.T. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1986, 20(1):87-96.
5. Atanassov K., Pasi G., Yager R. Intuitionistic fuzzy interpretations of multi-criteria multi-person and multi-measurement tool decision making. International Journal of Systems Science 2005, 36(14):859-868. 10.1080/00207720500382365.
6. Baležentis A., Baležentis T., Brauers W.K.M. Personnel selection based on computing with words and fuzzy MULTIMOORA. Expert Systems with Applications 2012, 39(9):7961-7967.
7. Bell, S., & Morse, S. (2008). Sustainability indicators: Measuring the immeasurable? Earthscan. http://books.google.com/books?id=6DOC13cd9c0C%26printsec=frontcover#v=onepage%26q%26f=false.
8. Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., & Giacchetta, G. (2012). Design for environment as a tool for the development of a sustainable supply chain (p. 383). New York: Springer.
9. Bhattacharya A., Susanto S., Geraghty J., Young P., Chou C.-C., Kuo F.-T., Tsou M.-C. Application of a combined fuzzy multiple criteria decision making and optimization programming model to the container transportation demand split. Applied Soft Computing 2010, 10(4):1080-1086.
10. Boran F.E., Boran K., Menlik T. The evaluation of renewable energy technologies for electricity generation in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 2012, 7(1):81-90. 10.1080/15567240903047483.
11. Budd W., Lovrich N., Pierce J.C., Chamberlain B. Cultural sources of variations in US urban sustainability attributes. Cities 2008, 25(5):257-267.
12. Carlsson C., Fullér R. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: Recent developments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1996, 78(2):139-153.
13. Carrasco R.A., Villar P., Hornos M.J. A linguistic multi-criteria decision making model applied to the integration of education questionnaires. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 2011, 4(5):946-959.
14. Ceccato V., Lukyte N. Safety and sustainability in a city in transition: The case of Vilnius, Lithuania. Cities 2011, 28(1):83-94.
15. Celik E., Bilisik O.N., Erdogan M., Gumus A.T., Baracli H. An integrated novel interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method to improve customer satisfaction in public transportation for Istanbul. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2013, 58:28-51.
16. Chai J., Liu J.N.K., Ngai E.W.T. Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications 2013, 40(10):3872-3885.
17. Chan F.T.S., Prakash A. Maintenance policy selection in manufacturing firms using the fuzzy MCDM approach. International Journal of Production Research 2012, 50(23):7044-7056.
18. Chang N.-B., Parvathinathan G., Breeden J.B. Combining GIS with fuzzy multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban region. Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 87(1):139-153.
19. Chen J.-K., Chen I.-S. Using a novel conjunctive MCDM approach based on DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP, and TOPSIS as an innovation support system for Taiwanese higher education. Expert Systems with Applications 2010, 37(3):1981-1990.
20. Chen V.Y.C., Lien H.-P., Liu C.-H., Liou J.J.H., Tzeng G.-H., Yang L.-S. Fuzzy MCDM approach for selecting the best environment-watershed plan. Applied Soft Computing 2011, 11(1):265-275.
21. City of Minneapolis Sustainability Report (2012). Minneapolis, MN. http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@citycoordinator/documents/webcontent/wcms1p-100400.pdf.
22. Collier M.J., Nedović-Budić Z., Aerts J., Connop S., Foley D., Foley K., Verburg P. Transitioning to resilience and sustainability in urban communities. Cities 2013, 32:S21-S28.
23. Dalalah D., Hayajneh M., Batieha F. A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Expert Systems with Applications 2011, 38(7):8384-8391.
24. Devuyst D., Hens L., De Lannoy W. How green is the city?: Sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments 2001, Columbia University Press.
25. Dursun M., Karsak E.E. A fuzzy MCDM approach for personnel selection. Expert Systems with Applications 2010, 37(6):4324-4330.
26. Egilmez G., Kucukvar M., Tatari O. Sustainability assessment of U.S. manufacturing sectors: An economic input output-based frontier approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013, 53:91-102.
27. Egilmez G., Kucukvar M., Tatari O., Bhutta M.K.S Supply chain sustainability assessment of the U.S. food manufacturing sectors: A life cycle-based frontier approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2014, 82:8-20.
28. Egilmez G., Park Y.S. Transportation related carbon, energy and water footprint analysis of U.S. manufacturing: An eco-efficiency assessment. Transportation Research Part D 2014, 32(October):143-159.
29. Egilmez G., Tatari O. A dynamic modeling approach to highway sustainability: Strategies to reduce overall impact. Transportation Research Part A 2011, 46(7):1086-1096.
30. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2013). Environmental indicators. Green communities. http://www.epa.gov/greenkit/indicator.htm.
31. Gaudreault C., Samson R., Stuart P. Implications of choices and interpretation in LCA for multi-criteria process design: De-inked pulp capacity and cogeneration at a paper mill case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 2009, 17(17):1535-1546.
32. Govindan K., Khodaverdi R., Jafarian A. A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013, 47:345-354. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.04.014.
33. Hernandez E.A., Uddameri V. Selecting agricultural best management practices for water conservation and quality improvements using Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Water Resources Management 2010, 24(15):4589-4612.
34. Hosseini Nasab H., Milani A.S. An improvement of quantitative strategic planning matrix using multiple criteria decision making and fuzzy numbers. Applied Soft Computing 2012, 12(8):2246-2253.
35. Kelemenis A., Askounis D. A new TOPSIS-based multi-criteria approach to personnel selection. Expert Systems with Applications 2010, 37(7):4999-5008.
36. Kucukvar M., Gumus S., Egilmez G., Tatari O. Ranking the sustainability performance of pavements: An intuitionistic fuzzy decision making method. Automation in Construction 2014, 40:33-43. 10.1016/j.autcon.2013.12.009.
37. Kucukvar M., Noori M., Egilmez G., Tatari O. Stochastic decision modeling for sustainable pavement designs. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2014, 1-15. 10.1007/s11367-014-0723-4.
38. Kucukvar M., Tatari O. Towards a triple bottom-line sustainability assessment of the U.S. construction industry. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2013, 18(5):958-972. 10.1007/s11367-013-0545-9.
39. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam V., Muralikrishnan S., Sivaraman G. Multi-criteria decision-making method based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Expert Systems with Applications 2011, 38(3):1464-1467.
40. Lee W.-S. Using MCDM to examine bank merger and acquisition evaluation and decision making model. The Service Industries Journal 2011, 1-22. 10.1080/02642069.2011.634905.
41. Liu H.-W., Wang G.-J. Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. European Journal of Operational Research 2007, 179(1):220-233.
42. Mega, V., & Pedersen, J. (1998). Urban sustainability indicators (p. 49). Luxembourg.
43. Moreno Pires S., Fidélis T., Ramos T.B. Measuring and comparing local sustainable development through common indicators: Constraints and achievements in practice. Cities 2014, 39:1-9.
44. Mori K., Christodoulou A. Review of sustainability indices and indicators: Towards a new City Sustainability Index (CSI). Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2012, 32(1):94-106.
45. Munda G. Measuring sustainability: A multi-criterion framework. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2005, 2(7):117-134.
46. Olewiler N. Environmental sustainability for urban areas: The role of natural capital indicators. Cities 2006, 23(3):184-195.
47. Owen, D. (2009). Green metropolis: Why living smaller, living closer, and driving less are the keys to sustainability (p. 368). Riverhead Trade [Reprint edition].
48. Pearsall H., Lucas S., Lenhardt J. The contested nature of vacant land in Philadelphia and approaches for resolving competing objectives for redevelopment. Cities 2013.
49. Pickett S.T.A., Boone C.G., McGrath B.P., Cadenasso M.L., Childers D.L., Ogden L.A., Grove J.M. Ecological science and transformation to the sustainable city. Cities 2013, 32:S10-S20.
50. Ramos T., Moreno Pires S. Sustainability assessment: The role of indicators. Sustainability assessment tools in higher education institutions 2013, 81-99. Springer International Publishing, Cham. S. Caeiro, W.L. Filho, C. Jabbour, U.M. Azeiteiro (Eds.).
51. Royte, E. (2009). Urban is good. Sunday book review. Retrieved 10.04.13. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/books/review/Royte-t.html?pagewanted=all.
52. SPSS software Predictive analytics software and solutions (2013). Retrieved 10.04.13. http://www-01.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/.
53. Sustainable City Progress Report (2012). Santa Monica (p. 30). http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/OSE/Categories/Sustainability/Sustainable-City-Plan.pdf.
54. Szmidt E., Kacprzyk J. Distances between intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2000, 114(3):505-518.
55. Szmidt E., Kacprzyk J. Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making. Control and Cybernetics 2002, 31:1055-1057.
56. Triantaphyllou E., Lin C.-T. Development and evaluation of five fuzzy multiattribute decision-making methods. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 1996, 14(4):281-310.
57. Tseng M.-L. Using a hybrid MCDM model to evaluate firm environmental knowledge management in uncertainty. Applied Soft Computing 2011, 11(1):1340-1352.
58. US and Canada Green City Index (2011). Munich, Germany.
59. Viteikiene M., Zavadskas E.K. Evaluating the sustainability of vilnius city residential areas. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 2007, 13(2):149-155.
60. Vlachos I.K., Sergiadis G.D. Intuitionistic fuzzy information - Applications to pattern recognition. Pattern Recognition Letters 2007, 28:197-206.
61. Wang P. QoS-aware web services selection with intuitionistic fuzzy set under consumer's vague perception. Expert Systems with Applications 2009, 36(3):4460-4466.
62. Wang J.-J., Jing Y.-Y., Zhang C.-F., Zhao J.-H. Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009, 13(9):2263-2278.
63. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987). Our common future (p. 43). http://www.iisd.org/sd/.
64. Wheeler S.M. Planning for metropolitan sustainability. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2000, 20:133-145.
65. Wu H.-Y., Lin Y.-K., Chang C.-H. Performance evaluation of extension education centers in universities based on the balanced scorecard. Evaluation and Program Planning 2011, 34(1):37-50.
66. Wu H.-Y., Tzeng G.-H., Chen Y.-H. A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications 2009, 36(6):10135-10147.
67. Xu Z., Hu H. Projection models for intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 2010, 09(02):267-280.
68. Ye J. Multicriteria fuzzy decision-making method using entropy weights-based correlation coefficients of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2010, 34(12):3864-3870.
69. Yedla S., Shrestha R.M. Multi-criteria approach for the selection of alternative options for environmentally sustainable transport system in Delhi. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2003, 37(8):717-729.
70. Yeh C.-H., Xu Y. Sustainable planning of e-waste recycling activities using fuzzy multicriteria decision making. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013, 52:194-204.
71. Zadeh L.A. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 1965, 8(3):338-353.