Next Article in Journal
REDD+ and Institutions
Previous Article in Journal
The Spread of Knowledge Management in SMEs: A Scenario in Evolution
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2015, 7(8), 10233-10249; doi:10.3390/su70810233

Robust Priority for Strategic Environmental Assessment with Incomplete Information Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Analysis

1
Department of Civil and Environmental System Engineering, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Korea
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Vincenzo Torretta
Received: 22 May 2015 / Revised: 9 July 2015 / Accepted: 23 July 2015 / Published: 31 July 2015
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Use of the Environment and Resources)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [1147 KB, uploaded 3 August 2015]   |  

Abstract

This study investigates how the priority rankings for dam construction sites vary with multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques and generation approaches for incomplete information. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) seeks to recommend sustainable dam construction sites based on their environmental and ecological impacts in a long-term plan for dam construction (LPDC) in South Korea. However, if specific information is missing, the SEA is less useful for choosing a dam construction site. In this study, we applied AHP, ELECTRE III, PROMETHEE II and Compromise Programming as MCDM techniques, and used binomial and uniform distributions to generate missing information. We considered five dam site selection situations and compared the results as they depended on both MCDM techniques and information generation methods. The binomial generation method showed the most obvious priorities. All MCDM techniques showed similar priorities in the dam site selection results except for ELECTREE III. The results demonstrate that selecting an appropriate MCDM technique is more important than the data generation method. However, using binomial distribution to generate missing information is more effective in providing a robust priority than uniform distribution, which is a commonly used technique. View Full-Text
Keywords: AHP; binomial distribution; compromise programming; electre III; incomplete information; multi-criteria decision making; priority; promethee II; uniform distribution AHP; binomial distribution; compromise programming; electre III; incomplete information; multi-criteria decision making; priority; promethee II; uniform distribution
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Park, D.; Kim, Y.; Um, M.-J.; Choi, S.-U. Robust Priority for Strategic Environmental Assessment with Incomplete Information Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Analysis. Sustainability 2015, 7, 10233-10249.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top