Evaluation of Corporate Sustainability

As a consequence of an increasing demand in sustainable development for business organizations, the evaluation of corporate sustainability has become a topic intensively focused by academic researchers and business practitioners. Several techniques in the context of multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) have been suggested to facilitate the evaluation and the analysis of sustainability performance. However, due to the complexity of evaluation, such as a compilation of quantitative and qualitative measures, interrelationships among various sustainability criteria, the assessor’s hesitation in scoring, or incomplete information, simple techniques may not be able to generate reliable results which can reflect the overall sustainability performance of a company. This paper proposes a series of mathematical formulations based upon the evidential reasoning (ER) approach which can be used to aggregate results from qualitative judgments with quantitative measurements under various types of complex and uncertain situations. The evaluation of corporate sustainability through the ER model is demonstrated using actual data generated from three sugar manufacturing companies in Thailand. The proposed model facilitates managers in analysing the performance and identifying improvement plans and goals. It also simplifies decision making related to sustainable development initiatives. The model can be generalized to a wider area of performance assessment, as well as to any cases of multiple criteria analysis

The problem of evaluating automated large-scale evidence aggregators

In the biomedical context, policy makers face a large amount of potentially discordant evidence from different sources. This prompts the question of how this evidence should be aggregated in the interests of best-informed policy recommendations. The starting point of our discussion is Hunter and Williams’ recent work on an automated aggregation method for medical evidence. Our negative claim is that it is far from clear what the relevant criteria for evaluating an evidence aggregator of this sort are. What is the appropriate balance between explicitly coded algorithms and implicit reasoning involved, for instance, in the packaging of input evidence? In short: What is the optimal degree of ‘automation’? On the positive side: We propose the ability to perform an adequate robustness analysis as the focal criterion, primarily because it directs efforts to what is most important, namely, the structure of the algorithm and the appropriate extent of automation. Moreover, where there are resource constraints on the aggregation process, one must also consider what balance between volume of evidence and accuracy in the treatment of individual evidence best facilitates inference. There is no prerogative to aggregate the total evidence available if this would in fact reduce overall accuracy

A method of classification for multisource data in remote sensing based on interval-valued probabilities

An axiomatic approach to intervalued (IV) probabilities is presented, where the IV probability is defined by a pair of set-theoretic functions which satisfy some pre-specified axioms. On the basis of this approach representation of statistical evidence and combination of multiple bodies of evidence are emphasized. Although IV probabilities provide an innovative means for the representation and combination of evidential information, they make the decision process rather complicated. It entails more intelligent strategies for making decisions. The development of decision rules over IV probabilities is discussed from the viewpoint of statistical pattern recognition. The proposed method, so called evidential reasoning method, is applied to the ground-cover classification of a multisource data set consisting of Multispectral Scanner (MSS) data, Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data, and digital terrain data such as elevation, slope, and aspect. By treating the data sources separately, the method is able to capture both parametric and nonparametric information and to combine them. Then the method is applied to two separate cases of classifying multiband data obtained by a single sensor. In each case a set of multiple sources is obtained by dividing the dimensionally huge data into smaller and more manageable pieces based on the global statistical correlation information. By a divide-and-combine process, the method is able to utilize more features than the conventional maximum likelihood method

Use of evidential reasoning and AHP to assess regional industrial safety

China’s fast economic growth contributes to the rapid development of its urbanization process, and also renders a series of industrial accidents, which often cause loss of life, damage to property and environment, thus requiring the associated risk analysis and safety control measures to be implemented in advance. However, incompleteness of historical failure data before the occurrence of accidents makes it difficult to use traditional risk analysis approaches such as probabilistic risk analysis in many cases. This paper aims to develop a new methodology capable of assessing regional industrial safety (RIS) in an uncertain environment. A hierarchical structure for modelling the risks influencing RIS is first constructed. The hybrid of evidential reasoning (ER) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is then used to assess the risks in a complementary way, in which AHP is hired to evaluate the weight of each risk factor and ER is employed to synthesise the safety evaluations of the investigated region(s) against the risk factors from the bottom to the top level in the hierarchy. The successful application of the hybrid approach in a real case analysis of RIS in several major districts of Beijing (capital of China) demonstrates its feasibility as well as provides risk analysts and safety engineers with useful insights on effective solutions to comprehensive risk assessment of RIS in metropolitan cities. The contribution of this paper is made by the findings on the comparison of risk levels of RIS at different regions against various risk factors so that best practices from the good performer(s) can be used to improve the safety of the others

An Introduction to Evidential Reasoning for Decision Making under Uncertainty: Bayesian and Belief Functions Perspectives

The main purpose of this article is to introduce the evidential reasoning approach, a research methodology, for decision making under uncertainty. Bayesian framework and Dempster-Shafer theory of belief functions are used to model uncertainties in the decision problem. We first introduce the basics of the DS theory and then discuss the evidential reasoning approach and related concepts. Next, we demonstrate how specific decision models can be developed from the basic evidential diagrams under the two frameworks. It is interesting to note that it is quite efficient to develop Bayesian models of the decision problems using the evidential reasoning approach compared to using the ladder diagram approach as used in the auditing literature. In addition, we compare the decision models developed in this paper with similar models developed in the literature

Screening and assessment tools for gaming disorder: A comprehensive systematic review

The inclusion of gaming disorder (GD) as an official diagnosis in the ICD-11 was a significant milestone for the field. However, the optimal measurement approaches for GD are currently unclear. This comprehensive systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate all available English-language GD tools and their corresponding evidence. A search of PsychINFO, PsychArticles, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified 32 tools employed in 320 studies (N = 462,249 participants). The evaluation framework examined tools in relation to: (1) conceptual and practical considerations; (2) alignment with DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria; (3) type and quantity of studies and samples; and (4) psychometric properties. The evaluation showed that GD instrumentation has proliferated, with 2.5 tools, on average, published annually since 2013. Coverage of DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria was inconsistent, especially for the criterion of continued use despite harm. Tools converge on the importance of screening for impaired control over gaming and functional impairment. Overall, no single tool was found to be clearly superior, but the AICA-Sgaming, GAS-7, IGDT-10, IGDS9-SF, and Lemmens IGD-9 scales had greater evidential support for their psychometric properties. The GD field would benefit from a standard international tool to identify gaming-related harms across the spectrum of maladaptive gaming behaviors.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support decisions in healthcare involving multiple and conflicting criteria. Although uncertainty is usually carefully addressed in health economic evaluations, whether and how the different sources of uncertainty are dealt with and with what methods in MCDA is less known. The objective of this study is to review how uncertainty can be explicitly taken into account in MCDA and to discuss which approach may be appropriate for healthcare decision makers. A literature review was conducted in the Scopus and PubMed databases. Two reviewers independently categorized studies according to research areas, the type of MCDA used, and the approach used to quantify uncertainty. Selected full text articles were read for methodological details. The search strategy identified 569 studies. The five approaches most identified were fuzzy set theory (45 % of studies), probabilistic sensitivity analysis (15 %), deterministic sensitivity analysis (31 %), Bayesian framework (6 %), and grey theory (3 %). A large number of papers considered the analytic hierarchy process in combination with fuzzy set theory (31 %). Only 3 % of studies were published in healthcare-related journals. In conclusion, our review identified five different approaches to take uncertainty into account in MCDA. The deterministic approach is most likely sufficient for most healthcare policy decisions because of its low complexity and straightforward implementation. However, more complex approaches may be needed when multiple sources of uncertainty must be considered simultaneousl