Skip to main content
No Access

A Choquet integral-based approach for assessing the sustainability of a new waste incinerator

Published Online:pp 157-177

The present paper proposes a multicriteria approach able to support decision makers in the choice of the best location for a new waste incinerator plant that has to be constructed in the Province of Torino (Italy). Three alternative sites have been compared based on different indicators that have been aggregated using the Choquet integral in order to obtain the global performance of each solution and to better highlight the tradeoffs between the aspects involved.

The aim of the analysis is to study the contribution that the Choquet integral offers in sustainability assessment of undesirable facilities location problems, taking into consideration the existence of interactions among the criteria and paying particular attention to the use of quantitative indicators in the evaluation process. Mention should be made to the fact that the analysis takes into account the opinion of several experts in determining the importance of the different elements of the model.

Keywords

multiple criteria decision aiding, Choquet integral, environmental analysis, integrated sustainability assessment, criteria interactions, undesirable facilities location problems

References

  • 1. Abastante, F. , Bottero, M. , Greco, S. , Lami, I. (2011). ‘Addressing the location of undesirable facilities through the dominance based rough set approach’. Paper presented at the 21st International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 13–17 June, Jyvaskyla, Finland Google Scholar
  • 2. Angilella, S. , Greco, S. , Matarazzo, B. (2010). ‘Non-additive robust ordinal regression: a multiple criteria decision model based on the Choquet integral’. European Journal of Operational Research. 201, 1, 277-288 Google Scholar
  • 3. ATOR – Associazione d’ambito Torinese per il governo dei Rifiuti (2008). Studio di localizzazione del termovalorizzatore della zona nord della Provincia di Torino. (accessed on 6 September 2011), available at http://www.atorifiutitorinese.it/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=95 Google Scholar
  • 4. Bana e Costa, C.A. , De Corte, J.M. , Vansnick, J.C. , Figueira, J. Greco, S. Ehrgott, M. (2005). ‘On the mathematical foundation of MACBETH’. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys. New York:Springer Google Scholar
  • 5. Berrah, L. , Cliville, V. (2007). ‘Towards an aggregation performance measurement system model in a supply chain context’. Computers in Industry. 58, 7, 709-719 Google Scholar
  • 6. Bottero, M. , Ferretti, V. (2011). ‘An analytic network process-based approach for location problems: the case of a waste incinerator plant in the Province of Torino (Italy)’. Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis. 17, 3–4, 63-84 Google Scholar
  • 7. Bouyssou, D. , Marchant, T. , Pirlot, M. , Tsoukias, A. , Vincke, P. (2006). Evaluation and Decision Models with Multiple Criteria. Stepping Stones for the Analyst. New York:Springer Google Scholar
  • 8. Brundtland, G. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford:Oxford University Press Google Scholar
  • 9. Choquet, G. (1953). ‘Theory of capacities’. Annales de l’Institute Fourier. 5, 131-295 Google Scholar
  • 10. Demirel, T. , Demirel, N.C. , Kahraman, C. (2010). ‘Multi-criteria warehouse location selection using Choquet integral’. Expert Systems with Applications. 37, 5, 3943-3952 Google Scholar
  • 11. European Commission, DGXI, Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection (1998). A Handbook on Environmental Assessment of Regional Development Plans and EU Structural Funds Programmes. (accessed on 8 September 2011), available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/sea-guidelines/handbook-full-text-part1.pdf Google Scholar
  • 12. FEEM (2009). FEEM Sustainability Index. (accessed on 22 September 2011), Methodological report, available at http://www.feemsi.org/pag/downloads.php Google Scholar
  • 13. Figueira, J. Greco, S. Ehrgott, M. (2005). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. State of the Art Survey. New York:Springer Google Scholar
  • 14. Figueira, J.R. , Greco, S. , Roy, B. (2009). ‘ELECTRE methods with interaction between criteria: an extension of the concordance index’. European Journal of Operational Research. 199, 3, 478-495 Google Scholar
  • 15. Giove, S. , Rosato, P. , Breil, M. (2011). ‘An application of multicriteria decision making to built heritage. The redevelopment of Venice Arsenale’. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. 17, 3–4, 85-99 Google Scholar
  • 16. Glasson, J. , Therivel, R. , Chadwick, A. (2005). Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment. London:Routledge Google Scholar
  • 17. Grabisch, M. (1996). ‘The application of fuzzy integrals in multicriteria decision making’. European Journal of Operational Research. 89, 3, 445-456 Google Scholar
  • 18. Grabisch, M. , Labreuche, C. (2008). ‘A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid’. 4OR. 6, 1, 1-44 Google Scholar
  • 19. Grabisch, M. , Labreuche, C. , Vasnick, J.C. (2003). ‘On the extension of pseudo-boolean functions for the aggregation of interaction criteria’. European Journal of Operational Research. 148, 1, 28-47 Google Scholar
  • 20. Heilpern, S. (2002). ‘Using Choquet integral in economics’. Statistical Papers. 43, 1, 53-73 Google Scholar
  • 21. Hu, Y.C. , Chen, H.C. (2010). ‘Choquet integral-based hierarchical networks for evaluating customer service perceptions on fast food stores’. Expert Systems with Applications. 37, 11, 7880-7887 Google Scholar
  • 22. Lang, T.M. , Chiang, J.H. , Lan, L.W. (2009). ‘Selection of optimal supplier in supply chain management strategy with analytic network process and Choquet integral’. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 57, 1, 330-340 Google Scholar
  • 23. Lee, H.H. , Yang, T.T. , Chen, C.B. , Chen, Y.L. (2011). ‘A fuzzy hierarchy integral analytic expert decision process in evaluating foreign investment entry mode selection for Taiwanese bio-tech firms’. Expert Systems with Applications. 38, 4, 3304-3322 Google Scholar
  • 24. Lin, C. (2008). The Choquet Integral Analytic Hierarchy Process for Radwaste Repository Site Selection in Taiwan. Berlin:Springer-Verlag Google Scholar
  • 25. Malczewski, J. (1999). GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. New York:John Wiley and Sons Google Scholar
  • 26. Meyer, P. , Ponthière, G. (2011). ‘Eliciting preferences on multiattribute societies with a Choquet integral’. Computational Economics. 37, 2, 133-168 Google Scholar
  • 27. Mondini, G. , Bottero, M. Mondini, G. (2009). ‘Il progetto di sostenibilità’. Valutazione e sostenibilità. Piani, programmi, progetti. Torino:Celid Google Scholar
  • 28. Morrison-Saunders, A. , Therivel, R. (2006). ‘Sustainability integration and assessment’. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 8, 3, 281-298 Google Scholar
  • 29. Munda, G. , Figueira, J. Greco, S. Ehrgott, M. (2005). ‘Multiple criteria decision analysis and sustainable development’. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys. New York:Springer Google Scholar
  • 30. Munda, G. (2006). ‘Social multi-criteria evaluation for urban sustainability policies’. Land Use Policy. 23, 1, 86-94 Google Scholar
  • 31. Murofushi, T. , Soneda, S. (1993). ‘Techniques for reading fuzzy measures (iii): interaction index’. Proceedings of the Ninth Fuzzy Systems Symposium. Sapporo, Japan, 693-696 Google Scholar
  • 32. OECD, European Commission, Joint Research Centre (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. (accessed on 6 September 2011), OECD publication, available at http://composite-indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Handbook.htm Google Scholar
  • 33. Rametsteiner, E. , Pulzl, H. , Alkan-Olsson, J. , Frederiksen, P. (2011). ‘Sustainability indicator: development science or political negotiation?’. Ecological Indicators. 11, 1, 61-70 Google Scholar
  • 34. Roy, B. , Bouyssou, D. (1995). Aide multicritére à la Décision: Méthodes et case. Paris:Economica Google Scholar
  • 35. Shapley, L.S. , Kuhn, H.W. Tucker, A.W. (1953). ‘A value for n-person games’. Contribution to the Theory of Games II. Princeton:Princeton University Press Google Scholar
  • 36. Simon, H.A. (1960). The New Science of Management Decision. New York:Harper and Brothers Google Scholar
  • 37. Singh, R.S. , Murty, H.R. , Gupta, K. , Dikshit, A.K. (2011). ‘An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies’. Ecological Indicators. 9, 2, 189-212 Google Scholar
  • 38. Sugeno, M. (1974). ‘Theory of fuzzy integrals and its applications’. Tokyo Institute of Technology, PhD thesis Google Scholar
  • 39. Tsai, H.H. , Lu, I.Y. (2006). ‘The evaluation of service quality using generalized Choquet integral’. Information Sciences. 176, 6, 640-663 Google Scholar
  • 40. Yazgan, H.R. , Boran, S. , Goztepe, K. (2010). ‘Selection of dispatching rules in FMS: ANP model based on BOCR with Choquet integral’. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 49, 5, 785-801 Google Scholar
  • 41. Zadeh, L.A. (1965). ‘Fuzzy set’. Information and Control. 8, 3, 338-353 Google Scholar