4.7 Article

Multi-criteria group decision making for evaluating the performance of e-waste recycling programs under uncertainty

Journal

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Volume 40, Issue -, Pages 127-135

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2015.02.035

Keywords

E-waste recycling programs; Intuitionistic fuzzy numbers; Multi-criteria analysis; Group decision making; Performance evaluation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents a multi-criteria group decision making approach for effectively evaluating the performance of e-waste recycling programs under uncertainty in an organization. Intuitionistic fuzzy numbers are used for adequately representing the subjective and imprecise assessments of the decision makers in evaluating the relative importance of evaluation criteria and the performance of individual e-waste recycling programs with respect to individual criteria in a given situation. An interactive fuzzy multi-criteria decision making algorithm is developed for facilitating consensus building in a group decision making environment to ensure that all the interest of individual decision makers have been appropriately considered in evaluating alternative e-waste recycling programs with respect to their corporate sustainability performance. The developed algorithm is then incorporated into a multi-criteria decision support system for making the overall performance evaluation process effectively and simple to use. Such a multi-criteria decision making system adequately provides organizations with a proactive mechanism for incorporating the concept of corporate sustainability into their regular planning decisions and business practices. An example is presented for demonstrating the applicability of the proposed approach in evaluating the performance of e-waste recycling programs in organizations. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available