Indian Journal of Science and Technology

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Evaluating and Prioritizing of Performance Indices of Environment Using Fuzzy TOPSIS


Affiliations
1 Department of Occupational Health, Research Center for Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran, Islamic Republic of
2 International Branch, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Islamic Republic of
 

One of the integral elements of sustainable development is to maintain environmental standards and to minimize environmental losses resulting from the development. Key environmental indices are used in developed countries to improve the performance of an environmental management system (EMS) along with their strategic goals. This paper aims to present a comprehensive approach for decision-makers to evaluate and prioritize environmental indices using a technique for order performance by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) as one of the most powerful and practical tools in multi attributed decision making (MADM) problems in the fuzzy environment. Considered indices for prioritizing of performance indices of Environment include specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, time-sensitive (SMART) indices. Results show that, Air quality Index, Sound Pressure Level, Green Space Index, CO2 and CH4 Emission rate index, Energy index, have the first to sixth rank in the field of performance selective indices. This research helps managers and decision makers in Environment to determine and rank the performance indices of environment in the organization and finally design an appropriate and practical plan for continuous improvement.

Keywords

Environment Performance Indices, Sustainable Development, TOPSIS, Fuzzy
User

  • Awasthi A, Chauhan SS and Goyal S (2010) A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers. Int. J. Product. Eco. 126(2), 370–378.

  • Azadeh A, Shirkouhi SN and Rezaie K (2010) A robust decision-making methodology for evaluation and selection of simulation software package. The Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 47(1),381–393.

  • Azadeh A, Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Hatami-Shirkouhi L and Ansarinejad A (2011) A unique fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: computer simulation approach for productive operators' assignment in cellular manufacturing systems with uncertainty and vagueness. The Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 56(1), 329–343.

  • Burvill C, Mead G, Weir J, McGowan P, Reuter M, Schiavone F and Leary M (2009) Evaluation of operational environmental performance: an engineering-based approach. Int. J. Sust. Design.1(2), 180 – 198.

  • Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets & Sys. 114(1),1–9.

  • Christine J (2000) Environmental performance evaluation and indicators. J.Cleaner Production. 8(1), 79-88.

  • Donaldson J (1996) US companies gear up for ISO 14001 certification. In Tech. 43(5), 34–37.

  • Hwang CL and Yoon K (1981) Multiple attributes decision making methods and applications. Springer, Berlin.

  • International Standard Organisation (1998) (ISO/DIS 14.031), Environmental performance evaluation.

  • Jelena J, Zdravko K, Sabrija R and Milan P (2010) Balanced scorecard evaluation model that includes elements of environmental management system using AHP model. Int. J. Quality Res. 4(1), 1-8.

  • Kaplan RS and Norton DP (2001) The strategyfocused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment.Harvard Business Press.

  • Kim G, Park CS and Yoon KP (1997) Identifying investment opportunities for advanced manufacturing systems with comparative-integrated performancemeasurement. Int. J. Production Eco. 50(1), 23–33.

  • Klassen RD and McLaughlin CP (1996) The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Manage. Sci. 42(8),1199-1214.

  • Kolk A and Mauser A (2002) The evolution of environmental management: from stage models to performance evaluation. Bus. Strategy & the Environ. 11(1), 14-31.

  • Melnyk SA, Sroufe RP and Calantone R (2003) Assessing the impact of environmental management systems on corporate and environmental performance. J. Operations Manage. 21(3), 329–351.

  • Munda G, Nijkamp P and Rietveld P (1994) Qualitative multicriteria evaluation for environmental management. Ecol. Econ.10(2), 97-112.

  • Nawrocka D and Parker T (2009) Finding the connection: environmental management systems and environmental performance. J. Cleaner Product.17(6), 601-607.

  • Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Ansarinejad A, Miri-Nargesi S, Dalfard VM and Rezaie K (2011) Information systems outsourcing decisions under fuzzy group decision making approach. Int. J. Inform. Technol. & Decision Making (IJITDM), 10(06), 989–1022.

  • Sadoughi S, Yarahmadi R, Taghdisi MH and Mehrabi Y (2011) Evaluating and prioritizing of performance indicators of health, safety, and environment usingfuzzy TOPSIS, Afr. J. Bus. Manage. 6(5),2026-2033.

  • Saengsupavanich C, Coowanitwong N, Gallardo WG and Lertsuchatavanich C (2009) Environmental performance evaluation of an industrial port and estate: ISO14001, port state control-derived indicators. J. Cleaner Production. 17(2), 154-161.

  • Tuzkaya G, Ozgen A, Ozgen D and Tuzkaya U (2009) Environmental performance evaluation of suppliers: A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach. Int. J.Environ.Sci. & Technol. 6(3),477–490.

  • Wang L, Xu L and Song H (2011) Environmental performance evaluation of Beijing's energy useplanning. Energy Policy. 39(6), 3483-3495.

  • Wang YM and Elhag T (2006) Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment. Expert Systems with Appl. 31(2),309–319.

  • Zarbini-Sydani A, Karbasi A and Atef-Yekta E (2011) Evaluating and selecting supplier in textile industry using hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS. Indian J.Sci.Technol. 4(10), 1322-1334.

  • Zhang C, Xie P and Cao M (2011) Research on environmental performance evaluation index system of Power Generation Enterprise. 6th Int. Forum onStrategic Technol. (IFOST). 1,632–635.


Abstract Views: 438

PDF Views: 123




  • Evaluating and Prioritizing of Performance Indices of Environment Using Fuzzy TOPSIS

Abstract Views: 438  |  PDF Views: 123

Authors

Rasoul Yarahmadi
Department of Occupational Health, Research Center for Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran, Islamic Republic of
Shima Sadoughi
International Branch, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Islamic Republic of

Abstract


One of the integral elements of sustainable development is to maintain environmental standards and to minimize environmental losses resulting from the development. Key environmental indices are used in developed countries to improve the performance of an environmental management system (EMS) along with their strategic goals. This paper aims to present a comprehensive approach for decision-makers to evaluate and prioritize environmental indices using a technique for order performance by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) as one of the most powerful and practical tools in multi attributed decision making (MADM) problems in the fuzzy environment. Considered indices for prioritizing of performance indices of Environment include specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, time-sensitive (SMART) indices. Results show that, Air quality Index, Sound Pressure Level, Green Space Index, CO2 and CH4 Emission rate index, Energy index, have the first to sixth rank in the field of performance selective indices. This research helps managers and decision makers in Environment to determine and rank the performance indices of environment in the organization and finally design an appropriate and practical plan for continuous improvement.

Keywords


Environment Performance Indices, Sustainable Development, TOPSIS, Fuzzy

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst%2F2012%2Fv5i5%2F30448