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

Development, test and comparison of two Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis(MCDA) models: A case of healthcare infrastructure location

When planning a new development, location decisions have always been a major issue. This paper examines and compares two modelling methods used to inform a healthcare infrastructure location decision. Two Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) models were developed to support the optimisation of this decision-making process, within a National Health Service (NHS) organisation, in the UK. The proposed model structure is based on seven criteria (environment and safety, size, total cost, accessibility, design, risks and population profile) and 28 sub-criteria. First, Evidential Reasoning (ER) was used to solve the model, then, the processes and results were compared with the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). It was established that using ER or AHP led to the same solutions. However, the scores between the alternatives were significantly different; which impacted the stakeholders‟ decision-making. As the processes differ according to the model selected, ER or AHP, it is relevant to establish the practical and managerial implications for selecting one model or the other and providing evidence of which models best fit this specific environment. To achieve an optimum operational decision it is argued, in this study, that the most transparent and robust framework is achieved by merging ER process with the pair-wise comparison, an element of AHP. This paper makes a defined contribution by developing and examining the use of MCDA models, to rationalise new healthcare infrastructure location, with the proposed model to be used for future decision. Moreover, very few studies comparing different MCDA techniques were found, this study results enable practitioners to consider even further the modelling characteristics to ensure the development of a reliable framework, even if this means applying a hybrid approach

Of Miracles and Evidential Probability: Hume’s “Abject Failure” Vindicated

This paper defends David Hume's "Of Miracles" from John Earman's (2000) Bayesian attack by showing that Earman misrepresents Hume's argument against believing in miracles and misunderstands Hume's epistemology of probable belief. It argues, moreover, that Hume's account of evidence is fundamentally non-mathematical and thus cannot be properly represented in a Bayesian framework. Hume's account of probability is show to be consistent with a long and laudable tradition of evidential reasoning going back to ancient Roman law

AN INTERVAL TYPE 2 FUZZY EVIDENTIAL REASONING APPROACH TO PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT

Recruitment process is a procedure of selecting an ideal candidate amongst different applicants who suit the qualifications required by the given institution in the best way. Due to the multi criteria nature of the recruitment process, it involves contradictory, numerous and incommensurable criteria that are based on quantitative and qualitative measurements. Quantitative criteria evaluation are not always dependent on the judgement of the expert, they are expressed in either monetary terms or engineering measurements, meanwhile qualitative criteria evaluation depend on the subjective judgement of the decision maker, human evaluation which is often characterized with subjectivity and uncertainties in decision making. Given the uncertain, ambiguous, and vague nature of recruitment process there is need for an applicable methodology that could resolve various inherent uncertainties of human evaluation during the decision making process. This work thus proposes an interval type 2 fuzzy evidential reasoning approach to recruitment process. The approach is in three phases; in the first phase in order to capture word uncertainty an interval type 2(IT2) fuzzy set Hao and Mendel Approach (HMA) is proposed to model the qualification requirement for recruitment process. This approach will cater for both intra and inter uncertainty in decision makers’judgments and demonstrates agreements by all subjects (decision makers) for the regular overlap of subject data intervals and the manner in which data intervals are collectively classified into their respective footprint of uncertainty. In the second phase the Intervaltype 2 fuzzy Analytical hierarchical process was employed as the weighting model to determine the weight of each criterion gotten from the decision makers. In the third phase the interval type 2 fuzzy was hybridized with the ranking evidential reasoning algorithm to evaluate each applicant to determine their final score in order to choose the most ideal candidate for recruitment.The implementation tool for phase two and three is Java programming language. Application of this proposed approach in recruitment process will resolve both intra and inter uncertainty in decision maker’s judgement and give room for consistent ranking even in place of incomplete requirement

The belief noisy-or model applied to network reliability analysis

One difficulty faced in knowledge engineering for Bayesian Network (BN) is the quan-tification step where the Conditional Probability Tables (CPTs) are determined. The number of parameters included in CPTs increases exponentially with the number of parent variables. The most common solution is the application of the so-called canonical gates. The Noisy-OR (NOR) gate, which takes advantage of the independence of causal interactions, provides a logarithmic reduction of the number of parameters required to specify a CPT. In this paper, an extension of NOR model based on the theory of belief functions, named Belief Noisy-OR (BNOR), is proposed. BNOR is capable of dealing with both aleatory and epistemic uncertainty of the network. Compared with NOR, more rich information which is of great value for making decisions can be got when the available knowledge is uncertain. Specially, when there is no epistemic uncertainty, BNOR degrades into NOR. Additionally, different structures of BNOR are presented in this paper in order to meet various needs of engineers. The application of BNOR model on the reliability evaluation problem of networked systems demonstrates its effectiveness