VIKOR Technique:A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications

The main objective of this paper is to present a systematic review of the VlseKriterijuska Optimizacija I Komoromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method in several application areas such as sustainability and renewable energy. This study reviewed a total of 176 papers, published in 2004 to 2015, from 83 high-ranking journals; most of which were related to Operational Research, Management Sciences, decision making, sustainability and renewable energy and were extracted from the “Web of Science and Scopus” databases. Papers were classified into 15 main application areas. Furthermore, papers were categorized based on the nationalities of authors, dates of publications, techniques and methods, type of studies, the names of the journals and studies purposes. The results of this study indicated that more papers on VIKOR technique were published in 2013 than in any other year. In addition, 13 papers were published about sustainability and renewable energy fields. Furthermore, VIKOR and fuzzy VIKOR methods, had the first rank in use. Additionally, the Journal of Expert Systems with Applications was the most significant journal in this study, with 27 publications on the topic. Finally, Taiwan had the first rank from 22 nationalities which used VIKOR technique

Food Supply without Risk: Multicriteria Analysis of Institutional Conditions of Exporters

[EN] International trade in food knows no borders, hence the need for prevention systems to avoid the consumption of products that are harmful to health. This paper proposes the use of multicriteria risk prevention tools that consider the socioeconomic and institutional conditions of food exporters. We propose the use of three decision-making methods-Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realite (ELECTRE), and Cross-Efficiency (CE)-to establish a ranking of countries that export cereals to the European Union, based on structural criteria related to the detection of potential associated risks (notifications, food quality, corruption, environmental sustainability in agriculture, and logistics). In addition, the analysis examines whether the wealth and institutional capacity of supplier countries influence their position in the ranking. The research was carried out biannually over the period from 2012-2016, allowing an assessment to be made of the possible stability of the markets. The results reveal that suppliers' rankings based exclusively on aspects related to food risk differ from importers' actual choices determined by micro/macroeconomic features (price, production volume, and economic growth). The rankings obtained by the three proposed methods are not the same, but present certain similarities, with the ability to discern countries according to their level of food risk. The proposed methodology can be applied to support sourcing strategies. In the future, food safety considerations could have increased influence in importing decisions, which would involve further difficulties for low-income countries.Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spain) and European Commission-ERDF. Project "Strengthening innovation policy in the agri-food sector" (RTI2018-093791-B-C22).Puertas Medina, RM.; Martí Selva, ML.; García Alvarez-Coque, JM. (2020). Food Supply without Risk: Multicriteria Analysis of Institutional Conditions of Exporters. International Journal of Environmental research and Public Health. 17(10):1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103432S1211710Walker, E., & Jones, N. (2002). An assessment of the value of documenting food safety in small and less developed catering businesses. Food Control, 13(4-5), 307-314. doi:10.1016/s0956-7135(02)00036-1Sun, Y.-M., & Ockerman, H. W. (2005). A review of the needs and current applications of hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) system in foodservice areas. Food Control, 16(4), 325-332. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2004.03.012Rohr, J. R., Barrett, C. B., Civitello, D. J., Craft, M. E., Delius, B., DeLeo, G. A., … Tilman, D. (2019). Emerging human infectious diseases and the links to global food production. Nature Sustainability, 2(6), 445-456. doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0293-3De Jonge, J., van Trijp, J. C. M., van der Lans, I. A., Renes, R. J., & Frewer, L. J. (2008). How trust in institutions and organizations builds general consumer confidence in the safety of food: A decomposition of effects. Appetite, 51(2), 311-317. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2008.03.008Neill, C. L., & Holcomb, R. B. (2019). Does a food safety label matter? Consumer heterogeneity and fresh produce risk perceptions under the Food Safety Modernization Act. Food Policy, 85, 7-14. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.04.001Wood, V. R., & Robertson, K. R. (2000). Evaluating international markets. International Marketing Review, 17(1), 34-55. doi:10.1108/02651330010314704Jouanjean, M.-A., Maur, J.-C., & Shepherd, B. (2015). Reputation matters: Spillover effects for developing countries in the enforcement of US food safety measures. Food Policy, 55, 81-91. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.06.001Van Ruth, S. M., Huisman, W., & Luning, P. A. (2017). Food fraud vulnerability and its key factors. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 67, 70-75. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2017.06.017Baylis, K., Nogueira, L., & Pace, K. (2010). Food Import Refusals: Evidence from the European Union. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(2), 566-572. doi:10.1093/ajae/aaq149Bouzembrak, Y., & Marvin, H. J. P. (2016). Prediction of food fraud type using data from Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) and Bayesian network modelling. Food Control, 61, 180-187. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.09.026Tudela-Marco, L., Garcia-Alvarez-Coque, J. M., & Martí-Selva, L. (2016). Do EU Member States Apply Food Standards Uniformly? A Look at Fruit and Vegetable Safety Notifications. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(2), 387-405. doi:10.1111/jcms.12503Verhaelen, K., Bauer, A., Günther, F., Müller, B., Nist, M., Ülker Celik, B., … Wallner, P. (2018). Anticipation of food safety and fraud issues: ISAR - A new screening tool to monitor food prices and commodity flows. Food Control, 94, 93-101. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.06.029Garcia‐Alvarez‐Coque, J., Taghouti, I., & Martinez‐Gomez, V. (2020). Changes in Aflatoxin Standards: Implications for EU Border Controls of Nut Imports. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 42(3), 524-541. doi:10.1093/aepp/ppy036Fischer, A. R. H., de Jong, A. E. I., de Jonge, R., Frewer, L. J., & Nauta, M. J. (2005). Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: The Need for a Transdisciplinary Approach. Risk Analysis, 25(3), 503-517. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00618.xHoughton, J. R., Rowe, G., Frewer, L. J., Van Kleef, E., Chryssochoidis, G., Kehagia, O., … Strada, A. (2008). The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities. Food Policy, 33(1), 13-26. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.05.001Demortain, D. (2012). Enabling global principle-based regulation: The case of risk analysis in the Codex Alimentarius. Regulation & Governance, 6(2), 207-224. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01144.xFAZIL, A., RAJIC, A., SANCHEZ, J., & MCEWEN, S. (2008). Choices, Choices: The Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to a Food Safety Decision-Making Problem. Journal of Food Protection, 71(11), 2323-2333. doi:10.4315/0362-028x-71.11.2323Ruzante, J. M., Davidson, V. J., Caswell, J., Fazil, A., Cranfield, J. A. L., Henson, S. J., … Farber, J. M. (2010). A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens. Risk Analysis, 30(5), 724-742. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01278.xMazzocchi, M., Ragona, M., & Zanoli, A. (2013). A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for the ex-ante impact assessment of food safety policies. Food Policy, 38, 177-189. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.11.011Govindan, K., Kadziński, M., & Sivakumar, R. (2017). Application of a novel PROMETHEE-based method for construction of a group compromise ranking to prioritization of green suppliers in food supply chain. Omega, 71, 129-145. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2016.10.004Segura, M., Maroto, C., & Segura, B. (2019). Quantifying the Sustainability of Products and Suppliers in Food Distribution Companies. Sustainability, 11(21), 5875. doi:10.3390/su11215875Lau, H., Nakandala, D., & Shum, P. K. (2018). A business process decision model for fresh-food supplier evaluation. Business Process Management Journal, 24(3), 716-744. doi:10.1108/bpmj-01-2016-0015Garcia-Alvarez-Coque, J.-M., Abdullateef, O., Fenollosa, L., Ribal, J., Sanjuan, N., & Soriano, J. M. (2020). Integrating sustainability into the multi-criteria assessment of urban dietary patterns. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 36(1), 69-76. doi:10.1017/s174217051900053xGrant, W. (2012). Economic patriotism in European agriculture. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(3), 420-434. doi:10.1080/13501763.2011.640797Maye, D., & Kirwan, J. (2013). Food security: A fractured consensus. Journal of Rural Studies, 29, 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.12.001Anthony, R. (2011). Taming the Unruly Side of Ethics: Overcoming Challenges of a Bottom-Up Approach to Ethics in the Areas of Food Policy and Climate Change. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(6), 813-841. doi:10.1007/s10806-011-9358-7MacMillan, T., & Dowler, E. (2011). Just and Sustainable? Examining the Rhetoric and Potential Realities of UK Food Security. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(2), 181-204. doi:10.1007/s10806-011-9304-8Jaud, M., Cadot, O., & Suwa-Eisenmann, A. (2013). Do food scares explain supplier concentration? An analysis of EU agri-food imports. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 40(5), 873-890. doi:10.1093/erae/jbs038Spink, J., Fortin, N. D., Moyer, D. C., Miao, H., & Wu, Y. (2016). Food Fraud Prevention: Policy, Strategy, and Decision-Making – Implementation Steps for a Government Agency or Industry. CHIMIA International Journal for Chemistry, 70(5), 320-328. doi:10.2533/chimia.2016.320Van Ruth, S. M., Luning, P. A., Silvis, I. C. J., Yang, Y., & Huisman, W. (2018). Differences in fraud vulnerability in various food supply chains and their tiers. Food Control, 84, 375-381. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.08.020Xidonas, P., & Psarras, J. (2009). Equity portfolio management within the MCDM frame: a literature review. International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance, 1(3), 285. doi:10.1504/ijbaaf.2009.022717Melo, M. T., Nickel, S., & Saldanha-da-Gama, F. (2009). Facility location and supply chain management – A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(2), 401-412. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.007Mandic, K., Delibasic, B., Knezevic, S., & Benkovic, S. (2014). Analysis of the financial parameters of Serbian banks through the application of the fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods. Economic Modelling, 43, 30-37. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2014.07.036Uygun, Ö., Kaçamak, H., & Kahraman, Ü. A. (2015). An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 86, 137-146. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.014Wanke, P., Azad, M. D. A. K., & Barros, C. P. (2016). Predicting efficiency in Malaysian Islamic banks: A two-stage TOPSIS and neural networks approach. Research in International Business and Finance, 36, 485-498. doi:10.1016/j.ribaf.2015.10.002Stojčić, M., Zavadskas, E., Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Mardani, A. (2019). Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018. Symmetry, 11(3), 350. doi:10.3390/sym11030350Xu, L., Shah, S. A. A., Zameer, H., & Solangi, Y. A. (2019). Evaluating renewable energy sources for implementing the hydrogen economy in Pakistan: a two-stage fuzzy MCDM approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(32), 33202-33215. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-06431-0Huang, I. B., Keisler, J., & Linkov, I. (2011). Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends. Science of The Total Environment, 409(19), 3578-3594. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.022Pons, O., de la Fuente, A., & Aguado, A. (2016). The Use of MIVES as a Sustainability Assessment MCDM Method for Architecture and Civil Engineering Applications. Sustainability, 8(5), 460. doi:10.3390/su8050460Shishegaran, A., Shishegaran, A., Mazzulla, G., & Forciniti, C. (2020). A Novel Approach for a Sustainability Evaluation of Developing System Interchange: The Case Study of the Sheikhfazolah-Yadegar Interchange, Tehran, Iran. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(2), 435. doi:10.3390/ijerph17020435Wu, H.-Y., Chen, J.-K., Chen, I.-S., & Zhuo, H.-H. (2012). Ranking universities based on performance evaluation by a hybrid MCDM model. Measurement, 45(5), 856-880. doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2012.02.009Shakouri G., H., & Tavassoli N., Y. (2012). Implementation of a hybrid fuzzy system as a decision support process: A FAHP–FMCDM–FIS composition. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(3), 3682-3691. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.09.063Mavi, R. K., Goh, M., & Mavi, N. K. (2016). Supplier Selection with Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS in the Context of Supply Chain Risk Management. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 216-225. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.017Montgomery, B., Dragićević, S., Dujmović, J., & Schmidt, M. (2016). A GIS-based Logic Scoring of Preference method for evaluation of land capability and suitability for agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 124, 340-353. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2016.04.013Debnath, A., Roy, J., Kar, S., Zavadskas, E., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). A Hybrid MCDM Approach for Strategic Project Portfolio Selection of Agro By-Products. Sustainability, 9(8), 1302. doi:10.3390/su9081302Seyedmohammadi, J., Sarmadian, F., Jafarzadeh, A. A., Ghorbani, M. A., & Shahbazi, F. (2018). Application of SAW, TOPSIS and fuzzy TOPSIS models in cultivation priority planning for maize, rapeseed and soybean crops. Geoderma, 310, 178-190. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.09.012Rostamzadeh, R., Ghorabaee, M. K., Govindan, K., Esmaeili, A., & Nobar, H. B. K. (2018). Evaluation of sustainable supply chain risk management using an integrated fuzzy TOPSIS- CRITIC approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 651-669. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.071Raut, R. D., Gardas, B. B., Kharat, M., & Narkhede, B. (2018). Modeling the drivers of post-harvest losses – MCDM approach. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 154, 426-433. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2018.09.035Qureshi, M. R. N., Singh, R. K., & Hasan, M. A. (2017). Decision support model to select crop pattern for sustainable agricultural practices using fuzzy MCDM. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20(2), 641-659. doi:10.1007/s10668-016-9903-7Srinivasa Rao, C., Kareemulla, K., Krishnan, P., Murthy, G. R. K., Ramesh, P., Ananthan, P. S., & Joshi, P. K. (2019). Agro-ecosystem based sustainability indicators for climate resilient agriculture in India: A conceptual framework. Ecological Indicators, 105, 621-633. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.038Paul, M., Negahban-Azar, M., Shirmohammadi, A., & Montas, H. (2020). Assessment of agricultural land suitability for irrigation with reclaimed water using geospatial multi-criteria decision analysis. Agricultural Water Management, 231, 105987. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105987Balezentis, T., Chen, X., Galnaityte, A., & Namiotko, V. (2020). Optimizing crop mix with respect to economic and environmental constraints: An integrated MCDM approach. Science of The Total Environment, 705, 135896. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135896Jahan, A., & Edwards, K. L. (2013). VIKOR method for material selection problems with interval numbers and target-based criteria. Materials & Design, 47, 759-765. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2012.12.072Pourhejazy, P., Kwon, O., Chang, Y.-T., & Park, H. (2017). Evaluating Resiliency of Supply Chain Network: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach. Sustainability, 9(2), 255. doi:10.3390/su9020255Stewart, T. J. (1996). Relationships between Data Envelopment Analysis and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(5), 654-665. doi:10.1057/jors.1996.77Li, X.-B., & Reeves, G. R. (1999). A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 115(3), 507-517. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(98)00130-1Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). STATE OF ART SURVEYS OF OVERVIEWS ON MCDM/MADM METHODS. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 165-179. doi:10.3846/20294913.2014.892037Mousavi-Nasab, S. H., & Sotoudeh-Anvari, A. (2017). A comprehensive MCDM-based approach using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an auxiliary tool for material selection problems. Materials & Design, 121, 237-253. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.041Bouyssou, D. (1999). Using DEA as a tool for MCDM: some remarks. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(9), 974-978. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600800Özcan, T., Çelebi, N., & Esnaf, Ş. (2011). Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methodologies and implementation of a warehouse location selection problem. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9773-9779. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.02.022LOKEN, E. (2007). Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(7), 1584-1595. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.11.005Darji, V. P., & Rao, R. V. (2014). Intelligent Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods for Material Selection in Sugar Industry. Procedia Materials Science, 5, 2585-2594. doi:10.1016/j.mspro.2014.07.519Ceballos, B., Lamata, M. T., & Pelta, D. A. (2016). A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods. Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 5(4), 315-322. doi:10.1007/s13748-016-0093-1Sen, B., Bhattacharjee, P., & Mandal, U. K. (2016). A comparative study of some prominent multi criteria decision making methods for connecting rod material selection. Perspectives in Science, 8, 547-549. doi:10.1016/j.pisc.2016.06.016Wu, D. (2006). A note on DEA efficiency assessment using ideal point: An improvement of Wang and Luo’s model. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 183(2), 819-830. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2006.06.030Kou, G., Peng, Y., & Wang, G. (2014). Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial risk analysis using MCDM methods. Information Sciences, 275, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2014.02.137Roy, B. (1991). The outranking approach and the foundations of electre methods. Theory and Decision, 31(1), 49-73. doi:10.1007/bf00134132YOON, K., & HWANG, C.-L. (1985). Manufacturing plant location analysis by multiple attribute decision making: part I—single-plant strategy. International Journal of Production Research, 23(2), 345-359. doi:10.1080/00207548508904712Doyle, J., & Green, R. (1994). Efficiency and Cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45(5), 567-578. doi:10.1057/jors.1994.84Martí, L., Martín, J. C., & Puertas, R. (2017). A Dea-Logistics Performance Index. Journal of Applied Economics, 20(1), 169-192. doi:10.1016/s1514-0326(17)30008-9Canadá y la UE: Si Quierohttps://www.Euroganadería.euKARABIYIK, C., & KUTLU KARABIYIK, B. (2018). Benchmarking International Trade Performance of OECD Countries: TOPSIS and AHP Approaches. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences. doi:10.21547/jss.267381Lin, M.-C., Wang, C.-C., Chen, M.-S., & Chang, C. A. (2008). Using AHP and TOPSIS approaches in customer-driven product design process. Computers in Industry, 59(1), 17-31. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.05.013Lourenzutti, R., & Krohling, R. A. (2016). A generalized TOPSIS method for group decision making with heterogeneous information in a dynamic environment. Information Sciences, 330, 1-18. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2015.10.005Roy, B. (1968). Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Revue française d’informatique et de recherche opérationnelle, 2(8), 57-75. doi:10.1051/ro/196802v100571Jaini, N., & Utyuzhnikov, S. (2016). Trade-off ranking method for multi-criteria decision analysis. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 24(3-4), e1600. doi:10.1002/mcda.1600Farrell, M. J. (1957). The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253. doi:10.2307/2343100Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078-1092. doi:10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078Angulo-Meza, L., & Lins, M. P. E. (2002). Annals of Operations Research, 116(1/4), 225-242. doi:10.1023/a:1021340616758Falagario, M., Sciancalepore, F., Costantino, N., & Pietroforte, R. (2012). Using a DEA-cross efficiency approach in public procurement tenders. European Journal of Operational Research, 218(2), 523-529. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.10.031Puertas, R., & Marti, L. (2019). Sustainability in Universities: DEA-GreenMetric. Sustainability, 11(14), 3766. doi:10.3390/su1114376

Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years

Purpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research

On Investigation an Assessment of Social Life of Dehdasht City Quarters using ELECTRE Model

Capabilities and facilities in urban areas have developed through the past of several years The appearance of these capabilities and facilities has come out through the cost of financial human and environmental Mere attention to physical skeletal and population and ignorance social factors in many of the previous studies has caused the failure of them The purpose of the present study is assessment of the social capacity of Dehdasht city quarters The method of the study is analytical-scale and has been conducted according to documentary and library research The data and information include related features and criteria according to assessment of the capability and capacity of social life in Dehdasht city quarters like identity and place belonging cooperation security dynamicity and vitality variety and social diversity and increasing the density through the model of ELECTRE According to the purpose of the research winch is the assessment and selection of the best quarter four quarters were chosen from different parts of the city The results showed that the old quarters were superior than the other ones and this fact refers to vitality and dynamicity of life as the results of relationship among different neighbors and place belonging residents cooperation in the quarter affairs and social variety in the construction of the old quarters The other places were given to the approximate new middle and new quarters which results from the lack of identity and lack of belonging in relation to the other quarter

Water quality sensor placement: a multi-objective and multi-criteria approach

[EN] To satisfy their main goal, namely providing quality water to consumers, water distribution networks (WDNs) need to be suitably monitored. Only well designed and reliable monitoring data enables WDN managers to make sound decisions on their systems. In this belief, water utilities worldwide have invested in monitoring and data acquisition systems. However, good monitoring needs optimal sensor placement and presents a multi-objective problem where cost and quality are conflicting objectives (among others). In this paper, we address the solution to this multi-objective problem by integrating quality simulations using EPANET-MSX, with two optimization techniques. First, multi-objective optimization is used to build a Pareto front of non-dominated solutions relating contamination detection time and detection probability with cost. To assist decision makers with the selection of an optimal solution that provides the best trade-off for their utility, a multi-criteria decision-making technique is then used with a twofold objective: 1) to cluster Pareto solutions according to network sensitivity and entropy as evaluation parameters; and 2) to rank the solutions within each cluster to provide deeper insight into the problem when considering the utility perspectives.The clustering process, which considers features related to water utility needs and available information, helps decision makers select reliable and useful solutions from the Pareto front. Thus, while several works on sensor placement stop at multi-objective optimization, this work goes a step further and provides a reduced and simplified Pareto front where optimal solutions are highlighted. The proposed methodology uses the NSGA-II algorithm to solve the optimization problem, and clustering is performed through ELECTRE TRI. The developed methodology is applied to a very well-known benchmarking WDN, for which the usefulness of the approach is shown. The final results, which correspond to four optimal solution clusters, are useful for decision makers during the planning and development of projects on networks of quality sensors. The obtained clusters exhibit distinctive features, opening ways for a final project to prioritize the most convenient solution, with the assurance of implementing a Pareto-optimal solution.Brentan, B.; Carpitella, S.; Barros, D.; Meirelles, G.; Certa, A.; Izquierdo Sebastián, J. (2021). Water quality sensor placement: a multi-objective and multi-criteria approach. Water Resources Management. 35(1):225-241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-020-02720-3S225241351Barak S, Mokfi T (2019) Evaluation and selection of clustering methods using a hybrid group mcdm. Expert Syst Appl 138:112817Berry JW, Fleischer L, Hart WE, Phillips CA, Watson JP (2005) Sensor placement in municipal water networks. J Water Resour Plan Manag 131 (3):237–243Bouyssou D, Marchant T (2015) On the relations between electre tri-b and electre tri-c and on a new variant of electre tri-b. Eur J Oper Res 242(1):201–211Brentan B, Carpitella S, Izquierdo J, Luvizotto E Jr, Meirelles G (2019) A multi-objective and multi-criteria approach for district metered area design: water operation and quality analysis. In: International conference on mathematical modeling in engineering & human behaviour, vol 2019, pp 110–117Brito AJ, de Almeida AT, Mota CM (2010) A multicriteria model for risk sorting of natural gas pipelines based on electre tri integrating utility theory. Eur J Oper Res 200(3):812–821Broad DR, Maier HR, Dandy GC, Nixon JB (2008) Optimal design of water distribution systems including water quality and system uncertainty. In: Water distribution systems analysis symposium, vol 2006, pp 1–17Candelieri A, Conti D, Archetti F (2014) A graph based analysis of leak localization in urban water networks. Procedia Eng 70:228–237Carpitella S, Brentan B, Montalvo I, Izquierdo J, Certa A (2018a) Multi-objective and multi-criteria analysis for optimal pump scheduling in water systems. EPiC Series Eng 3:364–371Carpitella S, Certa A, Izquierdo J, La Fata CM (2018b) k-out-of-n systems: an exact formula for the stationary availability and multi-objective configuration design based on mathematical programming and topsis. J Comput Appl Math 330:1007–1015Carpitella S, Ocaña-Levario SJ, Benítez J, Certa A, Izquierdo J (2018c) A hybrid multi-criteria approach to gpr image mining applied to water supply system maintenance. J Appl Geophy 159:754–764Certa A, Enea M, Galante GM, La Fata CM (2017) Electre tri-based approach to the failure modes classification on the basis of risk parameters: an alternative to the risk priority number. Comput Indust Eng 108:100–110Cheung P, Piller O, Propato M (2005) Optimal location of water quality sensors in supply systems by multiobjective genetic algorithms. In: Eight international conference on computing and control in the water industry CCWI05, vol 1, p 2Christodoulou SE, Gagatsis A, Xanthos S, Kranioti S, Agathokleous A, Fragiadakis M (2013) Entropy-based sensor placement optimization for waterloss detection in water distribution networks. Water Resour Manag 27 (13):4443–4468Corrente S, Greco S, Słowiński R (2016) Multiple criteria hierarchy process for electre tri methods. Eur J Oper Res 252(1):191–203Costa AS, Govindan K, Figueira JR (2018) Supplier classification in emerging economies using the electre tri-nc method: a case study considering sustainability aspects. J Clean Prod 201:925–947De Schaetzen W, Walters G, Savic D (2000) Optimal sampling design for model calibration using shortest path, genetic and entropy algorithms. Urban Water 2(2):141–152de Winter C, Palleti VR, Worm D, Kooij R (2019) Optimal placement of imperfect water quality sensors in water distribution networks. Comput Chem Eng 121:200–211Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6 (2):182–197Dias LC, Antunes CH, Dantas G, de Castro N, Zamboni L (2018) A multi-criteria approach to sort and rank policies based on delphi qualitative assessments and electre tri: the case of smart grids in brazil. Omega 76:100–111Eliades DG, Kyriakou M, Vrachimis S, Polycarpou MM (2016) Epanet-matlab toolkit: An open-source software for interfacing epanet with matlab. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on computing and control for the water industry, CCWIFernandez E, Navarro J (2011) A new approach to multi-criteria sorting based on fuzzy outranking relations: the theseus method. Eur J Oper Res 213 (2):405–413Fernández E, Figueira JR, Navarro J, Roy B (2017) Electre tri-nb: a new multiple criteria ordinal classification method. Eur J Oper Res 263 (1):214–224Figueira JR, Greco S, Roy B, Słowiński R (2010) Electre methods: main features and recent developments. In: Handbook of multicriteria analysis. Springer, New York, pp 51–89Figueira JR, Greco S, Roy B, Słowiński R (2013) An overview of electre methods and their recent extensions. J Multi-Criteria Dec Anal 20 (1-2):61–85Francés-Chust J, Brentan BM, Carpitella S, Izquierdo J, Montalvo I (2020) Optimal placement of pressure sensors using fuzzy dematel-based sensor influence. Water 12(2):493Gandy M (2004) Rethinking urban metabolism: water, space and the modern city. City 8(3):363–379Giudicianni C, Herrera M, Di Nardo A, Greco R, Creaco E, Scala A (2020) Topological placement of quality sensors in water-distribution networks without the recourse to hydraulic modeling. J Water Resour Plan Manag 146 (6):04020030Hart WE, Murray R (2010) Review of sensor placement strategies for contamination warning systems in drinking water distribution systems. J Water Resour Plan Manag 136(6):611–619Herrera M, Abraham E, Stoianov I (2016) A graph-theoretic framework for assessing the resilience of sectorised water distribution networks. Water Resour Manag 30(5):1685–1699Huang JJ, McBean EA, James W (2008) Multi-objective optimization for monitoring sensor placement in water distribution systems. In: Water distribution systems analysis symposium, vol 2006, pp 1–14Kapelan ZS, Savic DA, Walters GA (2003) A hybrid inverse transient model for leakage detection and roughness calibration in pipe networks. J Hydraul Res 41(5):481–492Lee JH (2013) Determination of optimal water quality monitoring points in sewer systems using entropy theory. Entropy 15(9):3419–3434Liu Z, Ming X (2019) A methodological framework with rough-entropy-electre tri to classify failure modes for co-implementation of smart pss. Adv Eng Inform 42:100968Marchi A, Salomons E, Ostfeld A, Kapelan Z, Simpson AR, Zecchin AC, Maier HR, Wu ZY, Elsayed SM, Song Y et al (2013) Battle of the water networks ii. J Water Resour Plan Manag 140(7):04014009Mohammed A, Harris I, Soroka A, Nujoom R (2019) A hybrid mcdm-fuzzy multi-objective programming approach for a g-resilient supply chain network design. Comput Indust Eng 127:297–312Montalvo I, Izquierdo J, Pérez-garcía R, Herrera M (2014) Water distribution system computer-aided design by agent swarm optimization. Comput-Aided Civ Inf Eng 29(6):433–448Mousseau V, Slowinski R, Zielniewicz P (2000) A user-oriented implementation of the electre-tri method integrating preference elicitation support. Comput Opera Res 27(7-8):757–777Nafi A, Crastes E, Sadiq R, Gilbert D, Piller O (2018) Intentional contamination of water distribution networks: developing indicators for sensitivity and vulnerability assessments. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 32(2):527–544Neto JGD, Machado MAS, Gomes LFAM, Caldeira AM, Sallum FSV (2017) Investments in a new technological infrastructure: Decision making using the electre-tri methodology. Procedia Comput Sci 122:194–199Ohar Z, Lahav O, Ostfeld A (2015) Optimal sensor placement for detecting organophosphate intrusions into water distribution systems. Water Res 73:193–203Oliker N, Ostfeld A (2015) Network hydraulics inclusion in water quality event detection using multiple sensor stations data. Water Res 80:47–58Ostfeld A, Salomons E (2005) Optimal early warning monitoring system layout for water networks security: Inclusion of sensors sensitivities and response delays. Civ Eng Environ Syst 22(3):151–169Ostfeld A, Uber JG, Salomons E, Berry JW, Hart WE, Phillips CA, Watson JP, Dorini G, Jonkergouw P, Kapelan Z et al (2008) The battle of the water sensor networks (bwsn): A design challenge for engineers and algorithms. J Water Resour Plan Manag 134(6):556–568Quiñones-Grueiro M, Verde C, Llanes-santiago O (2019) Multi-objective sensor placement for leakage detection and localization in water distribution networks. In: 2019 4th conference on control and fault tolerant systems (SysTol), IEEE, pp 129–134Ramezanian R (2019) Estimation of the profiles in posteriori electre tri: A mathematical programming model. Comput Indust Eng 128:47–59Rathi S, Gupta R, Kamble S, Sargaonkar A (2016) Risk based analysis for contamination event selection and optimal sensor placement for intermittent water distribution network security. Water Resour Manag 30(8):2671–2685Reginaldo F (2015) Portfolio management in Brazil and a proposal for evaluation and balancing of portfolio projects with electre tri and iris. Procedia Comput Sci 55:1265–1274Roy B (1968) Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Revue française d’informatique et de recherche opérationnelle 2(8):57–75Roy B (1990) The outranking approach and the foundations of electre methods. In: Readings in multiple criteria decision aid. Springer, New York, pp 155–183Sánchez-Lozano J, García-cascales M, Lamata M (2016) Comparative topsis-electre tri methods for optimal sites for photovoltaic solar farms. case study in spain. J Clean Prod 127:387–398Seiti H, Hafezalkotob A, Najafi SE, Khalaj M (2019) Developing a novel risk-based mcdm approach based on d numbers and fuzzy information axiom and its applications in preventive maintenance planning. Appl Soft Comput: 105559Shang F, Uber JG, Rossman LA et al (2008) Epanet multi-species extension user’s manual. risk reduction engineering laboratory us environmental protection agency. Cincinnati, OhioShannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27(3):379–423Štirbanović Z, Stanujkić D, Miljanović I, Milanović D (2019) Application of mcdm methods for flotation machine selection. Miner Eng 137:140–146Wang H, Jiang Z, Zhang H, Wang Y, Yang Y, Li Y (2019) An integrated mcdm approach considering demands-matching for reverse logistics. J Clean Prod 208:199–210Wéber R, Hős C (2020) Efficient technique for pipe roughness calibration and sensor placement for water distribution systems. J. Water Resour Plan Manag 146(1):04019070Weickgenannt M, Kapelan Z, Blokker M, Savic DA (2010) Risk-based sensor placement for contaminant detection in water distribution systems. J Water Resour Plan Manag 136(6):629–63

Assessment of the effects of best environmental practices on reducing pesticide contamination in surface water, using multi-criteria modeling combined with a GIS.

For half a century, the significant development of intensive farming has led to a massive use of products such as pesticides. The excessive use of these substances has contaminated surface water and groundwater. Some drinking water extraction points have also had to be abandoned. Around 30 years ago, in the southwest of France, a group of farmers decided to improve their farming methods, as well as developing new best environmental practices, such as grass strips along streams and riparian forests.By combining ELECTRE TRI-C, a sorting multi-criteria model, with a GIS, we were able to assign each farming parcel to one of the five levels of risk associated with surface water pesticide contamination. We also assessed the effectiveness of best environmental practices, and found that their use led to a reduction in the risk of pesticide transfer. This methodology re-enforces decision support tools for both water resource managers and agricultural and environmental stakeholders

Multi-criteria decision methods to support the maintenance management of complex systems

[ES] Esta tesis doctoral propone el uso de métodos de toma de decisiones multi-criterio (MCDM, por sus iniciales en inglés) como herramienta estratégica para apoyar la gestión del mantenimiento de sistemas complejos. El desarrollo de esta tesis doctoral se enmarca dentro de un acuerdo de cotutela entre la Università degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA) y la Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV), dentro de sus respectivos programas de doctorado en 'Ingeniería de Innovación Tecnológica' y 'Matemáticas'. Estos programas están estrechamente vinculados a través del tópico MCDM, ya que proporciona herramientas cruciales para gestionar el mantenimiento de sistemas complejos reales utilizando análisis matemáticos serios. El propósito de esta sinergia es tener en cuenta de forma sólida la incertidumbre al atribuir evaluaciones subjetivas, recopilar y sintetizar juicios atribuidos por varios responsables de la toma de decisiones, y tratar con conjuntos grandes de esos elementos. El tema principal del presente trabajo de doctorado es el gestionamiento de las actividades de mantenimiento para aumentar los niveles de innovación tecnológica y el rendimiento de los sistemas complejos. Cualquier sistema puede ser considerado objeto de estudio, incluidos los sistemas de producción y los de prestación de servicios, entre otros, mediante la evaluación de sus contextos reales. Esta tesis doctoral propone afrontar la gestión del mantenimiento a través del desarrollo de tres líneas principales de investigación estrechamente vinculadas. ¿ La primera es el núcleo, e ilustra la mayoría de los aspectos metodológicos de la tesis. Se refiere al uso de métodos MCDM para apoyar decisiones estratégicas de mantenimiento, y para hacer frente a la incertidumbre que afecta a los datos/evaluaciones, incluso cuando están involucrados varios responsables (expertos en mantenimiento) en la toma de decisiones. ¿ La segunda línea desarrolla análisis de fiabilidad para sistemas complejos reales (también en términos de fiabilidad humana) sobre cuya base se debe implementar cualquier actividad de mantenimiento. Estos análisis consideran la configuración de fiabilidad de los componentes del sistema en estudio y las características específicas del entorno operativo. ¿ La tercera línea de investigación aborda aspectos metodológicos importantes de la gestión de mantenimiento y enfatiza la necesidad de monitorizar el funcionamiento de las actividades de mantenimiento y de evaluar su efectividad utilizando indicadores adecuados. Se ha elaborado una amplia gama de casos de estudio del mundo real para evaluar la eficacia de los métodos MCDM en el mantenimiento y así probar la utilidad del enfoque propuesto.[CA] Aquesta tesi doctoral proposa l'ús de mètodes de presa de decisions multi-criteri (MCDM, per les seves inicials en anglès) com a eina estratègica per donar suport a la gestió del manteniment de sistemes complexos. El desenvolupament d'aquesta tesi doctoral s'emmarca dins d'un acord de cotutela entre la Università degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA) i la Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV), dins dels seus respectius programes de doctorat en 'Enginyeria d'Innovació Tecnològica' i ' Matemàtiques '. Aquests programes estan estretament vinculats a través del tòpic MCDM, ja que proporciona eines crucials per gestionar el manteniment de sistemes complexos reals utilitzant anàlisis matemàtics profunds. El propòsit d'aquesta sinergia és tenir en compte de forma sòlida la incertesa en atribuir avaluacions subjectius, recopilar i sintetitzar judicis atribuïts per diversos responsables de la presa de decisions, i tractar amb conjunts grans d'aquests elements en els problemes plantejats. El tema principal del present treball de doctorat es la gestió de les activitats de manteniment per augmentar els nivells d'innovació tecnològica i el rendiment dels sistemes complexos. Qualsevol sistema pot ser considerat objecte d'estudi, inclosos els sistemes de producció i els de prestació de serveis, entre d'altres, mitjançant l'avaluació dels seus contextos reals. Aquesta tesi doctoral proposa afrontar la gestió del manteniment mitjançant el desenvolupament de tres línies principals d'investigació estretament vinculades. ¿ La primera és el nucli, i il·lustra la majoria dels aspectes metodològics de la tesi. Es refereix a l'ús de mètodes MCDM per donar suport a decisions estratègiques de manteniment, i per fer front a la incertesa que afecta les dades/avaluacions, fins i tot quan estan involucrats diversos responsables (experts en manteniment) en la presa de decisions. ¿ La segona línia desenvolupa anàlisis de fiabilitat per a sistemes complexos reals (també en termes de fiabilitat humana) sobre la qual base s'ha d'implementar qualsevol activitat de manteniment. Aquestes anàlisis consideren la configuració de fiabilitat dels components del sistema en estudi i les característiques específiques de l'entorn operatiu. ¿ La tercera línia d'investigació aborda aspectes metodològics importants de la gestió de manteniment i emfatitza la necessitat de monitoritzar el funcionament de les activitats de manteniment i d'avaluar la seva efectivitat utilitzant indicadors adequats. S'ha elaborat una àmplia gamma de casos d'estudi del món real per avaluar l'eficàcia dels mètodes MCDM en el manteniment i així provar la utilitat de l'enfocament proposat.[EN] This doctoral thesis proposes using multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods as a strategic tool to support maintenance management of complex systems. The development of this doctoral thesis is framed within a cotutelle (co-tutoring) agreement between the Università degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA) and the Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV), within their respective programmes of doctorates in 'Technological Innovation Engineering' and 'Mathematics'. Regarding this thesis, these programmes are closely linked through the topic of MCDM, providing crucial tools to manage maintenance of real complex systems by applying in-depth mathematical analyses. The purpose of this connection is to robustly take into account uncertainty in attributing subjective evaluations, collecting and synthetizing judgments attributed by various decision makers, and dealing with large sets of elements characterising the faced issue. The main topic of the present doctoral work is the management of maintenance activities to increase the levels of technological innovation and performance of the analysed complex systems. All kinds of systems can be considered as objects of study, including production systems and service delivery systems, among others, by evaluating their real contexts. Thus, this doctoral thesis proposes facing maintenance management through the development of three tightly linked main research lines. ¿ The first is the core and illustrates most of the methodological aspects of the thesis. It refers to the use of MCDM methods for supporting strategic maintenance decisions, and dealing with uncertainty affecting data/evaluations even when several decision makers are involved (experts in maintenance). ¿ The second line develops reliability analyses for real complex systems (also in terms of human reliability analysis) on the basis of which any maintenance activity must be implemented. These analyses are approached by considering the reliability configuration of both the components belonging to the system under study and the specific features of the operational environment. ¿ The third research line focuses on important methodological aspects to support maintenance management, and emphasises the need to monitor the performance of maintenance activities and evaluate their effectiveness using suitable indicators. A wide range of real real-world case studies has been faced to evaluate the effectiveness of MCDM methods in maintenance and then prove the usefulness of the proposed approach.Carpitella, S. (2019). Multi-criteria decision methods to support the maintenance management of complex systems [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/11911