Comprehensive methods for dealing with uncertainty in assessing sustainability part 1: The MIVES-monte carlo method

Soft Computing Applications for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 69-106

  Pilar De La Cruz, M ^a   Castro, Alberto ^a   Del Caño, Alfredo ^a   Gómez, Diego ^b   Lara, Manuel ^a   Cartelle, Juan J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF A CORUÑA   (Spain)

^b Intacta Gestión Ambiental   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FUNCTION EVALUATION; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

COMPREHENSIVE METHOD; DEGREE OF UNCERTAINTY; DETERMINISTIC METHODS; ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY; MONTE CARLO SIMULATION TECHNIQUE; SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; SUSTAINABILITY EVALUATIONS; SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES;

MONTE CARLO METHODS;

EID: 84946136259     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-6631-3.ch004     Document Type: Chapter

References (77)

1. Aguado, A., del Caño, A., de la Cruz, M. P., Gómez, D., & Josa, A. (2012). Sustainability assessment of concrete structures within the Spanish structural concrete code. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(2), 268-276. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000419.
2. Ahn, B. S., & Han, C. H. (2005). Determining multiple attribute weights consistent with pairwise preference orders. In O. Gervasi et al. (Eds.), Computational Science and its Applications - ICSSA 2005 (pp. 360-367). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/11424925_39.
3. Alarcón, B., Aguado, A., Manga, R., & Josa, A. (2011). A value function for assessing sustainability: Application to industrial buildings. Sustainability, 3(1), 35-50. doi:10.3390/su3010035.
4. Banuelas, R., & Antony, J. (2004). Modified analytic hierarchy process to incorporate uncertainty and managerial aspects. International Journal of Production Research, 42(18), 3851-3872. doi:10.1080/0 0207540410001699183.
5. Bojórquez, L. A., Sánchez, S., & Flore, A. (2005). Building consensus in environmental impact assessment through multicriteria modeling and sensitivity analysis. Environmental Management, 36(3), 469-481. doi:10.1007/s00267-004-0127-5.
6. Brugha, C. (2004). Structure of multi-criteria decision-making. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(11), 1156-1168. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601777.
7. Burton, J., & Hubacek, K. (2007). Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local governments. Energy Policy, 35(12), 6402-6412. doi:10.1016/j.enpol. 2007.08.002.
8. Chapman, C. B., & Ward, S. (2011). How to manage project opportunity and risk. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
9. Chapman, R. J. (1998). The effectiveness of working group risk identification and assessment techniques. International Journal of Project Management, 16(6), 333-343. doi:10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00015-5.
10. Chapman, R. J. (2001). The controlling influences on effective risk identification and assessment for construction design management. International Journal of Project Management, 19(3), 147-160. doi:10.1016/S0263-7863(99)00070-8.
11. Cuadrado, J., Roji, E., San José, J. T., & Reyes, J. P. (2012). Sustainability index for industrial buildings. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Structures and Buildings, 165(5), 245-253. doi:10.1680/stbu.10.00029.
12. Dawood, H. (2011). Theories of interval arithmetic: Mathematical foundations and applications. Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
13. del Caño, A., & de la Cruz, M. P. (2002). Integrated methodology for project risk management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(6), 473-485. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:6(473).
14. del Caño, A., Gómez, D., & de la Cruz, M. P. (2012). Uncertainty analysis in the sustainable design of concrete structures: A probabilistic method. Construction & Building Materials, 37, 865-873. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.020.
15. Diakoulaki, D., & Karangelis, F. (2007). Multi-criteria decision analysis and cost-benefit analysis of alternative scenarios for the power generation sector in Greece. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(4), 716-727. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.06.007.
16. Elmahgraby, S. E. (2005). On the fallacy of averages in project risk management. European Journal of Operational Research, 165(2), 307-313. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.003.
17. Fishman, G. (2003). Monte Carlo: Concepts, algorithms, and applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
18. Forbes, C., Evans, M., Hastings, N., & Peacock, B. (2011). Statistical distributions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
19. Forman, E. H. (1990). Random Indices for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 153-155. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(90)90072-J.
20. Gallego, D. G., & Mack, A. (2010). Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy, 38(2), 1030-1039. doi:10.1016/j. enpol.2009.10.055.
21. Glasserman, P. (2003). Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering. New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-21617-1.
22. Gómez, D., del Caño, A., de la Cruz, M. P., & Josa, A. (2012a). Metodología genérica para la evaluación de la sostenibilidad de sistemas constructivos - El método MIVES. In A. Aguado (Ed.), Sostenibilidad y Construcción (pp. 385-411). Barcelona, Spain: Asociación Científico-Técnica del Hormigón.
23. Gómez, D., del Caño, A., de la Cruz, M. P., & Josa, A. (2012b). Evaluación de la sostenibilidad en estructuras de hormigón y metálicas. La EHE y la EAE. Análisis preliminar. In A. Aguado (Ed.), Sostenibilidad y Construcción (pp. 413-439). Barcelona, Spain: Asociación Científico-Técnica del Hormigón.
24. Graedel, T. E. (1998). Streamlined life-cycle assessment. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
25. Grey, S. (1995). Practical risk assessment for project management. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
26. Hahn, E. D. (2003). Decision making with uncertain judgments: A stochastic formulation of the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Sciences, 34(3), 443-466. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5414.2003.02274.x.
27. Han, C. H. (2004). Tools for establishing dominance with linear partial information and attribute hierarchy. International Journal of Systems Science, 35(2), 123-132. doi:10.1080/00207720410001671714.
28. Hillson, D., & Simon, P. (2007). Practical project risk management: the Atom methodology. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.
29. Hsiao, S. W., & Chou, J. R. (2006). A gestalt-like perceptual measure for home page design using a fuzzy entropy approach. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 137-156. doi:10.1016/j. ijhcs.2005.05.005.
30. Instituto para la Diversificación y Ahorro de la Energía. (2000). Impactos ambientales de la producción eléctrica. Análisis de Ciclo de Vida de ocho tecnologías de generación eléctrica. Madrid, Spain: Instituto para la Diversificación y Ahorro de la Energía.
31. International Organization for Standardization. (2002). ISO 14048:2002. Environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Documentation format. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
32. International Organization for Standardization. (2006a). ISO 14040:2006. Environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Principles and framework. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
33. International Organization for Standardization. (2006b). ISO 14044:2006. Environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Requirements and guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
34. Jaeckel, P. (2002). Monte Carlo methods in finance. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley.
35. Kaya, T., & Kahraman, C. (2010). Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul. Energy, 35(6), 2517-2527. doi:10.1016/j.energy. 2010.02.051.
36. Keramat, M., & Kielbasa, R. (1997). Latin Hypercube sampling Monte Carlo estimation of average quality index for integrated circuits. Analog Integrated Circuits and Signal Processing, 14(1-2), 131-142. doi:10.1023/A:1008207113480.
37. Kowalski, K., Stagl, S., Madlener, R., & Omann, I. (2009). Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(3), 1063-1074. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.12.049.
38. Kroese, D. P., Taimre, T., & Botev, Z. I. (2011). Handbook of Monte Carlo methods. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781118014967.
39. Krykova, I. (2003). Evaluating of path-dependent securities with low discrepancy methods. (Master's Thesis). Forcester Polytechnic Institute.
40. Law, A. M., & Kelton, W. D. (2000). Simulation modelling and analysis. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
41. Lu, Y., Yan, D., & Liu, B. (2009). A fuzzy model for evaluating cultivation quality of talents of software engineering at the Campus Universities. Journal of Service Science and Management, 2009(2), 56-60.
42. Lukas, L. (2011). Weight generation and construction of preferences by Monte Carlo method in AHP with inconsistent interval comparison matrices. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Mathematical Methods in Economics (pp. 449-454). Janska Dolina, Slovakia: Professional Publishing.
43. Madlener, R., Kowalski, K., & Stagl, S. (2007). New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria. Energy Policy, 35(12), 6060-6074. doi:10.1016/j. enpol.2007.08.015.
44. Manassero, G., Semeraro, Q., & Tolio, T. (2004). A new method to cope with decision makers' uncertainty in the equipment selection process. CIPR Annals - Manufacturing Technology, 53(1), 389-392.
45. Matthews, H. S., Lave, L., & MacLean, H. (2002). Life cycle impact assessment: A challenge for risk analysts. Risk Analysis, 22(5), 853-860. doi:10.1111/1539-6924.00256.
46. Maytorena, E., Winch, G. M., Freeman, J., & Kiely, T. (2007). The influence of experience and information search styles on project risk identification performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(2), 315-326. doi:10.1109/TEM.2007.893993.
47. Metropolis, N. (1987). The beginning of the Monte Carlo method. Los Alamos Science, 15, 125-130.
48. Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H., & Teller, E. (1953). Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 21(6), 1087-1092. doi:10.1063/1.1699114.
49. Metropolis, N., & Ulam, S. (1949). The Monte Carlo method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44(247), 335-341. doi:10.1080/01621459.1949.10483310.
50. Moore, R. E. (1966). Interval analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
51. Moore, R. E. (1979) Methods and applications of interval analysis. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). doi:10.1137/1.9781611970906.
52. Moore, R. E., Kearfott, R. B., & Cloud, M. J. (2009). Introduction to interval analysis. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). doi:10.1137/1.9780898717716.
53. Noll, H. H. (2002). Towards a European system of social indicators. Theoretical framework and system architecture. Social Indicators Research, 58(1-3), 47-87. doi:10.1023/A:1015775631413.
54. Papadopoulos, A., & Karagiannidis, A. (2008). Application of the multi-criteria analysis method Electre III for the optimisation of decentralised energy systems. Omega, 36(5), 766-776. doi:10.1016/j. omega.2006.01.004.
55. Petkovic, M. S., & Petkovic, L. D. (1998). Complex interval arithmetic and its applications. New York, NY: Wiley-VCH.
56. Pons, O., & Aguado, A. (2012). Integrated value model for sustainable assessment applied to technologies used to build schools in Catalonia, Spain. Building and Environment, 53, 49-58. doi:10.1016/j. buildenv.2012.01.007.
57. Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (5th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
58. Reyes, J. P., San-José, J. T., Cuadrado, J., & Sancibrian, R. (2014). Health & safety criteria for determining the sustainable value of construction projects. Safety Science, 62, 221-232. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.023.
59. Ríos, S., Ríos-Insua, M. J., & Ríos-Insua, S. (1989). Procesos de decisión multicriterio. Madrid, Spain: Eudema.
60. Robert, C., & Casella, G. (2005). Monte Carlo statistical methods (2nd ed.). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
61. Rosenbloom, E. S. (1997). A probabilistic interpretation of the final rankings in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 96(2), 371-378. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(96)00049-5.
62. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
63. Saaty, T. L. (2006). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.
64. Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (1987). Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 32(1), 107-117. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(87)90275-X.
65. San José, J. T., & Cuadrado, J. (2010). Industrial building design stage based on a system approach to their environmental sustainability. Construction & Building Materials, 24(4), 438-447. doi:10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2009.10.019.
66. San José, J. T., & Garrucho, I. (2010). A system approach to the environmental analysis of industrial buildings. Building and Environment, 45(3), 673-683. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.012.
67. Stam, A., & Duarte Silva, A. P. (1997). Stochastic judgments in the AHP: The measurement of rank reversal probabilities. Decision Sciences, 28(3), 655-688. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01326.x.
68. Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study. Berlin / Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3157-6.
69. United Nations Organization. (1987). "Our Common Future" (Brundtland Report). United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. WCED.
70. United Nations Organization. (1992) "Rio Declaration on Environment and Development." United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). Río de Janeiro, Brasil.
71. Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña. (2013). MIVES. Page related to the MIVES method, including a downloading zone with a probabilistic MIVES computer application developed jointly by some of the authors and other researchers belonging to the Technical University of Catalonia (Spain). Retrieved December 20, 2013 from http://www.etcg.upc.edu/prj/mives.
72. Upham, P., Shackley, S., & Waterman, H. (2007). Public and stakeholder perceptions of 2030 bioenergy scenarios for the Yorkshire and Humber region. Energy Policy, 35(9), 4403-4412. doi:10.1016/j. enpol.2007.03.002.
73. Van den Honert, R. C. (1998). Stochastic group preference modelling in the multiplicative AHP: A model of group consensus. European Journal of Operational Research, 110(1), 99-111. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00243-9.
74. Williams, T. M. (1992). Practical use of distributions in network analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43(3), 265-270. doi:10.1057/jors.1992.35.
75. Williams, T. M. (1996). The two-dimensionality of project risk. International Journal of Project Management, 14(3), 185-186. doi:10.1016/0263-7863(96)00030-0.
76. Zhao, Z. Y., Zhao, X. J., Davidson, K., & Zuo, J. (2012). A corporate social responsibility indicator system for construction enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 29-30, 277-289. doi:10.1016/j. jclepro.2011.12.036.
77. Zio, E. (2012). The Monte Carlo simulation method for system reliability and risk analysis. London: Springer.