Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) as a powerful tool for sustainable development: Effective applications of AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR in sustainability

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
( Peer-Reviewed, Open Access, Fully Refereed International Journal )
Volume:05/Issue:04/April-2023 Impact Factor- 7.868 www.irjmets.com
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[2654]
MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING (MCDM) AS A POWERFUL TOOL FOR
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: EFFECTIVE APPLICATIONS OF AHP, FAHP,
TOPSIS, ELECTRE, AND VIKOR IN SUSTAINABILITY
Nitin Liladhar Rane*1, Anand Achari*2, Saurabh P. Choudhary*3
*1,2,3Vivekanand Education Society's College Of Architecture (VESCOA), Mumbai, India.
DOI : https://www.doi.org/10.56726/IRJMETS36215
ABSTRACT
In this research paper, the focus is on exploring the use of various powerful multi-criteria decision-making
(MCDM) methods for sustainable development. The paper examines the effective utilization of a range of
methods such as Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP), Technique for
Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la Realité
(ELECTRE), and VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) in the context of
sustainability. The advantages and limitations of each method are discussed, and a comparative analysis of their
effectiveness in decision-making for sustainable development is provided. Furthermore, the research paper
delves into specific areas of sustainability, including construction, business, finance, accounting, industry, site
selection, renewable energy, water resource management, water quality management, agriculture, and material
selection. In addition, the paper highlights the importance of using hybrid MCDM methods in promoting
sustainable development, which combines the strengths of different decision-making methods to provide more
accurate and robust results. The overall aim of this research paper is to provide a comprehensive
understanding of the different areas of sustainability and how MCDM methods can be utilized to achieve
sustainable development. The study intends to contribute to the development of effective decision-making
frameworks for sustainable development, providing insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners in
the field of sustainability.
Keywords: Sustainability, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM), Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Fuzzy
Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP), Technique For Order Of Preference By Similarity To Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS), Sustainable Development.
I. INTRODUCTION
Sustainable development has garnered immense significance in the contemporary world owing to its potential
to foster economic, social, and environmental benefits [1-5]. The concept advocates meeting the present needs
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. However, decision-making in
sustainable development is inherently intricate as it entails consideration of multiple criteria and stakeholder
perspectives. In this regard, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods serve as an effective approach for
grappling with the complexity of sustainable development decision-making [6,7]. These methods facilitate the
evaluation of multiple criteria, empowering decision-makers to arrive at well-informed and comprehensive
decisions that take into account the diverse factors that contribute to sustainability.
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP), Technique for Order of Preference
by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE), and
VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) are some of the MCDM methods available for
sustainable development decision-making. Each of these methods provides a distinct approach to decision-
making, allowing decision-makers to choose the most suitable method for their specific decision-making
context.
The effective application of MCDM methods can assist organizations and governments in making sustainable
development decisions that are transparent, objective, and inclusive [8,9]. It can also promote stakeholder
participation and ensure that the decision-making process incorporates the diverse perspectives and values of
different stakeholders. This paper aims to offer an overview of the various MCDM methods available for
sustainable development decision-making and explore their effective application in different contexts. The
paper will also delve into the strengths and weaknesses of each method and provide guidance on selecting the

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2655]
most appropriate method for different decision-making scenarios. Table 1 shows the MCDM methods have
been widely studied and applied in various fields, including sustainability, engineering, economics, and social
sciences.
Table 1: MCDM methods which are widely studied and applied in various fields
Method Acronym Description
Analytic Hierarchy
Process
AHP
A decision-making technique that helps structure complex problems into a
hierarchy of criteria and alternatives, and then evaluates them based on
pairwise comparisons using numerical scores. AHP is useful when there are
multiple criteria to consider, and when the decision maker wants to
incorporate subjective judgments into the decision-making process.
Fuzzy Analytic
Hierarchy Process
FAHP
An extension of AHP that incorporates fuzzy logic to handle imprecise or
uncertain data in the decision-making process. FAHP is useful when there is
uncertainty or ambiguity in the decision problem, and when precise
numerical data is not available.
Technique for
Order of
Preference by
Similarity to Ideal
Solution
TOPSIS
A method that ranks alternatives based on their similarity to the ideal
solution and dissimilarity to the worst solution, using distance measures such
as Euclidean or Manhattan distance. TOPSIS is useful when there are multiple
criteria to consider, and when the decision maker has a clear idea of what
constitutes the best and worst solutions.
Elimination and
Choice Expressing
Reality
ELECTRE
A family of methods that use outranking relations to compare alternatives
based on a set of criteria, and then select the best alternatives using a
preference threshold. ELECTRE is useful when there are multiple criteria to
consider, and when the decision maker wants to incorporate non-
compensatory rules, such as minimum or maximum thresholds for each
criterion.
VlseKriterijumska
Optimizacija I
Kompromisno
Resenje
VIKOR
A method that combines the concepts of compromise programming and
outranking relations to determine the best alternative based on both the
overall performance and the distance from the ideal solution. VIKOR is useful
when there are multiple criteria to consider, and when the decision maker
wants to balance overall performance with the differences between the best
and worst alternatives.
Simple Additive
Weighting
SAW
A method that assigns weights to each criterion based on its relative
importance, and then sums the weighted scores for each alternative to
determine the overall performance. SAW is useful when the decision maker
has a clear idea of the relative importance of each criterion, and when the
decision problem is relatively simple.
Weighted Sum
Model
WSM
A method that assigns weights to each criterion based on its relative
importance, and then sums the weighted scores for each alternative to
determine the overall performance. WSM is similar to SAW, but allows for the
use of non-linear or non-additive functions to combine the scores for each
criterion. WSM is useful when the decision maker has a clear idea of the
relative importance of each criterion, and when the decision problem is
relatively simple.
II. UNDERSTANDING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Sustainable development involves achieving a balance between economic, social, and environmental factors to
meet the needs of the present generation without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs. A comprehensive approach that includes various sectors, such as energy, transportation,

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2656]
agriculture, and urban planning, is required to achieve sustainable development. This essay will explore how
multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods can be used to understand sustainable development in
these sectors. MCDM is a tool that helps decision-makers evaluate and select the best alternatives based on
multiple criteria or objectives [10]. By breaking down complex decisions into smaller parts, MCDM methods
provide a structured approach to decision-making. Mathematical models are used to analyze and evaluate the
alternatives based on the criteria, which helps to identify the best option.
The energy sector is critical for sustainable development as it is responsible for a significant portion of global
greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. Hence, transitioning to cleaner and renewable
energy sources is vital. MCDM methods can be used to evaluate different energy sources based on multiple
criteria, including cost, availability, reliability, and environmental impact. For instance, the Analytic Hierarchy
Process (AHP) is an MCDM method that involves breaking down the decision into a hierarchical structure
comprising a goal, criteria, and alternatives [10-11]. A pairwise comparison matrix is developed to assign
values that reflect the relative importance of each criterion, which are then used to calculate the weights for
each criterion. Evaluating each alternative based on the criteria involves assigning a score to each alternative,
which is multiplied by the weights for each criterion to calculate a total score. The alternative with the highest
score and efficiency should be selected as the best option [12-16].
MCDM methods can also evaluate transportation options for sustainable development, given the significant
impact of the transportation sector on the environment, social equity, and economic development. For instance,
the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) involves developing a decision
matrix that represents the alternatives and criteria. The matrix is then normalized to eliminate units of
measurement and ensure that all criteria are comparable. The performance of each alternative against each
criterion is then represented in the decision matrix, and the best option is selected based on a comprehensive
evaluation [17].
III. SUSTAINABILITY IN CONSTRUCTION USING MCDM METHODS
Sustainability has become a crucial factor in the construction industry due to the increasing focus on the
environment. In order to reduce the impact of construction activities on the environment, it is imperative for
the industry to adopt sustainable practices [18]. Sustainable construction is a concept that encompasses
economic, social, and environmental factors to ensure that the built environment is functional and
environmentally responsible. Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are a valuable approach to
assessing the sustainability of construction projects.
MCDM methods refer to a set of techniques used to make decisions based on multiple criteria [19]. These
methods enable decision-makers to analyze different alternatives and choose the best one based on several
criteria. In terms of sustainability in construction, MCDM methods can be used to evaluate the environmental,
economic, and social impacts of the project. The methods consider various criteria, such as energy efficiency,
water usage, waste reduction, and social responsibility, and weigh them to provide a comprehensive
assessment of the sustainability of a construction project.
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most widely used MCDM methods for assessing sustainability in
construction. AHP involves breaking down complex problems into smaller sub-problems, establishing
priorities, and comparing alternatives. It can be utilized to evaluate the sustainability of construction projects
by identifying the most critical sustainability criteria and comparing different construction alternatives against
these criteria. AHP provides a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability of a construction project,
allowing decision-makers to make informed choices.
Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is another MCDM method that can
be utilized to assess sustainability in construction. TOPSIS involves ranking alternatives based on their
proximity to an ideal solution, with the ideal solution representing the most desirable outcome. It can be used
to evaluate the sustainability of construction projects by identifying the most critical sustainability criteria and
comparing different construction alternatives against these criteria. TOPSIS provides a clear ranking of

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2657]
construction alternatives based on their sustainability, enabling decision-makers to select the most sustainable
alternative.
Multi-Objective Optimization on the Basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA)
Multi-Objective Optimization on the Basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA) is another MCDM method that can be
employed to assess sustainability in construction. MOORA involves ranking alternatives based on their ratios of
benefits to costs. It can be used to evaluate the sustainability of construction projects by identifying the most
critical sustainability criteria and comparing different construction alternatives against these criteria. MOORA
provides a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability of a construction project, allowing decision-makers
to choose the most sustainable alternative.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
MCDM methods can also be used to assess the sustainability of construction materials. Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA) is a commonly used method to evaluate the environmental impact of construction materials. LCA
involves analyzing the entire life cycle of a material, from the extraction of raw materials to disposal or
recycling. It can be used to evaluate the sustainability of construction materials by analyzing their
environmental impact and identifying alternatives that have a lower environmental impact.
Sustainability has become a critical factor [20-25] in the construction industry, and MCDM methods are an
effective approach to assessing the sustainability of construction projects and materials. These methods
consider various criteria, such as environmental impact, economic viability, and social responsibility, and weigh
them to provide a holistic assessment of the sustainability of a construction project. AHP, TOPSIS, MOORA, and
LCA are some of the MCDM methods that can be utilized to assess sustainability in construction, enabling
decision-makers to make informed choices that are environmentally responsible.
Table 2: MCDM Methods for Assessing Sustainability in Construction
MCDM Method Description
Application in Assessing Sustainability in
Construction
Analytic Hierarchy
Process (AHP)
A method that involves
breaking down complex
problems, establishing
priorities, and comparing
alternatives based on multiple
criteria.
Evaluating the sustainability of construction
projects by identifying critical criteria and
comparing alternatives to provide a
comprehensive assessment.
Technique for Order
of Preference by
Similarity to Ideal
Solution (TOPSIS)
A method that involves ranking
alternatives based on their
proximity to an ideal solution.
Assessing sustainability by identifying critical
criteria and ranking construction alternatives
based on their sustainability.
Multi-Objective
Optimization on the
Basis of Ratio
Analysis (MOORA)
A method that involves ranking
alternatives based on their
ratios of benefits to costs.
Providing a comprehensive assessment of
sustainability by identifying critical criteria and
comparing alternatives.
Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques have become increasingly popular in recent years due to
their effectiveness in assisting decision-makers in evaluating and prioritizing complex sustainability issues in
construction. In the face of growing emphasis on sustainable development, construction stakeholders are facing
challenges in managing economic, social, and environmental impacts effectively. MCDM techniques offer a
framework for analyzing these impacts and identifying viable solutions.
A. Selection of building materials
One crucial application of MCDM in sustainability in construction is in the selection of building materials.
Building materials selection involves numerous decisions that have a significant impact on the sustainability
performance of a building. MCDM techniques can help evaluate and rank building materials based on various

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2658]
criteria such as environmental impact, cost, durability, and safety to ensure the most sustainable option is
chosen.
B. Selection of construction methods
Another significant application of MCDM in sustainability in construction is in the selection of construction
methods. Construction methods have a significant impact on the sustainability performance of a building, and
traditional methods often result in high environmental impacts. MCDM techniques can help evaluate and rank
construction methods based on various criteria such as environmental impact, cost, safety, and energy
efficiency to ensure that the most sustainable construction method is chosen.
C. Applications during the design phase of a construction project
MCDM techniques can also be applied during the design phase of a construction project to ensure that
sustainability objectives are met. Decisions regarding building orientation, energy systems, water systems, and
materials made during the design phase have a significant impact on the sustainability performance of a
building. MCDM techniques can assist in evaluating and ranking design options based on various criteria such
as energy efficiency, cost, environmental impact, and occupant comfort to ensure that the most sustainable
design is chosen.
D. Assess the sustainability performance of a building
MCDM techniques can also help assess the sustainability performance of a building. Sustainability assessments
are often conducted to measure the sustainability performance of a building and identify areas for
improvement. MCDM techniques can assist in evaluating and ranking sustainability indicators such as energy
use, water use, and waste management to ensure that the building is performing as sustainably as possible.
MCDM techniques can be used to evaluate the sustainability performance of construction projects as a whole.
Construction projects have a significant impact on the environment, economy, and society, and it is crucial to
assess their overall sustainability performance [26]. MCDM techniques can help evaluate and rank
sustainability indicators such as carbon emissions, resource use, and social impact to ensure that the project is
sustainable.
MCDM techniques can also be applied in stakeholder engagement in sustainability decision-making in
construction. Stakeholder engagement is critical in ensuring that sustainability objectives are understood, and
stakeholders are involved in decision-making. MCDM techniques can assist in evaluating and ranking
stakeholder preferences and priorities to ensure that the most sustainable decision is made [27]. MCDM
techniques offer a wide range of applications in sustainability in construction. These techniques can assist in
the selection of building materials and construction methods, the design of sustainable buildings, the
assessment of sustainability performance, the evaluation of the sustainability performance of construction
projects, and stakeholder engagement in sustainability decision-making [5,28]. By incorporating MCDM
techniques in sustainability decision-making in construction and other fields, stakeholders can ensure that the
most sustainable decisions are made, leading to more sustainable construction and other field practices and
ultimately contributing to a more sustainable future [28-33].
IV. SUSTAINABILITY IN BUSINESS, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING
Sustainability has become a critical aspect for businesses, finance, and accounting, and decision-making
processes in these fields need to consider environmental, social, and economic impacts. Due to the complexity
of sustainability-related decisions, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods have emerged as popular
tools to support decision-making.
A. Overview of Sustainability in Business, Finance, and Accounting
The integration of environmental, social, and economic considerations into decision-making processes of
organizations is known as sustainability in business, finance, and accounting. Sustainability emerged in
response to the negative impacts of economic growth and development on the environment and society. The
integration of sustainability practices into businesses, finance, and accounting practices can bring several
benefits, including enhanced reputation, reduced risks, and improved stakeholder relationships. However,
implementing sustainability practices requires consideration of multiple criteria and stakeholder perspectives,
which can make decision-making processes challenging. MCDM methods can provide a systematic and

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2659]
structured approach to support sustainability-related decisions by taking into account multiple criteria and
stakeholder perspectives.
B. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
MCDM methods are tools that enable the evaluation and selection of alternatives based on multiple criteria. Due
to the complexity of sustainability-related decisions, MCDM methods have become widely used in decision-
making processes. There are three categories of MCDM methods: classical, outranking, and interactive.
Classical MCDM methods are based on mathematical models that aggregate criteria into a single objective
function. Examples of classical MCDM methods include the weighted sum model, the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP), and the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS).
Outranking MCDM methods compare alternatives using a set of decision rules without aggregating criteria into
a single objective function. Examples of outranking MCDM methods include TOPSIS, the elimination and choice
expressing reality (ELECTRE), and the preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation
(PROMETHEE).
Interactive MCDM methods involve the participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process.
Interactive MCDM methods enable stakeholders to express their preferences and values and provide feedback
on the decision-making process [34]. Examples of interactive MCDM methods include the deliberative multi-
criteria evaluation (DMCE), the interactive decision maps (IDM), and the decision conferencing approach
(DCA).
C. Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability-Related Decision-Making
MCDM methods can be applied in various sustainability-related decision-making processes, such as sustainable
supply chain management, sustainable investment, and sustainability reporting.
Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) involves the integration of environmental and social
considerations into supply chain management practices to improve the sustainability performance of the entire
supply chain. MCDM methods can support SSCM by enabling the evaluation and selection of suppliers based on
sustainability criteria. For instance, AHP can rank suppliers based on environmental, social, and economic
criteria according to the preferences of decision-makers and stakeholders.
Sustainable Investment
Sustainable investment integrates environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations into investment
decisions. MCDM methods can support sustainable investment decisions by evaluating and selecting
investment alternatives based on ESG criteria.
Sustainability Reporting
Sustainability reporting involves the disclosure of an organization's sustainability performance to stakeholders.
MCDM methods can support sustainability reporting by evaluating and selecting sustainability indicators and
ranking organizations based on sustainability performance.
Sustainability has become a crucial aspect of decision-making in businesses, finance, and accounting, and
MCDM methods have emerged as popular tools to support sustainability-related decisions. MCDM methods can
provide a structured and systematic approach to evaluate the decision making.
V. SUSTAINABILITY IN SITE SELECTION
Sustainability is a crucial factor to consider when selecting a site for a new facility. The process of site selection
involves identifying a location that is suitable for the intended purpose, such as a factory, office, or store.
Sustainability, on the other hand, entails meeting the needs of the present generation while preserving
resources for future generations [35-38]. The concept of sustainability in site selection involves finding a
location that has minimal environmental impact, promotes social equity, and is economically viable. To evaluate
sustainability in site selection, multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods can be used [2,39]. These
methods involve employing mathematical models to consider various criteria simultaneously. MCDM
techniques are beneficial when there are several decision criteria to assess, and their relative importance is not

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2660]
clear. MCDM methods can help in prioritizing criteria, assigning weights to each criterion, and evaluating
alternative options based on their performance against these criteria.
The first step in applying MCDM methods for sustainability in site selection is defining the criteria.
Sustainability is a multifaceted concept that involves environmental, economic, and social factors. Thus,
relevant criteria may include environmental impact, resource usage, social equity, and economic feasibility. The
next step is to weight the criteria according to their relative importance. This step involves assigning
weightings to each criterion, reflecting the values and priorities of the decision-makers. Various methods can be
used to weight the criteria, including Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Simple Multi-Attribute Rating
Technique (SMART), and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Once the
criteria have been weighted, the alternatives must be evaluated. Alternatives are the various locations under
consideration for the new facility. Each alternative is evaluated based on its performance against the criteria.
This step involves collecting data on the environmental impact, resource usage, social equity, and economic
viability of each alternative.
Several methods can be used to evaluate alternatives in MCDM, including Multi-Attribute Utility Theory
(MAUT), Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE), and Preference Ranking Organization Method
for Enrichment Evaluations (PROMETHEE). These methods enable decision-makers to calculate a utility score
for each alternative, compare each alternative to a set of decision rules, and rank each alternative based on its
performance against the criteria. Evaluating sustainability in site selection is crucial for decision-makers in
various industries. MCDM methods can help to evaluate multiple criteria simultaneously, prioritize criteria,
weigh their relative importance, and evaluate alternatives based on their performance against the criteria. By
employing MCDM methods, decision-makers can select a location that has minimal environmental impact,
promotes social equity, and is economically viable, while ensuring the efficient use of resources.
Following are the some of the applications of sustainable site selection using MCDM methods:
Urban planning
In urban planning, decision-makers can use MCDM methods to evaluate potential sites for development
projects, such as residential or commercial complexes, considering factors like public transportation
availability, access to services, and environmental impact. The goal is to choose a site that maximizes
community benefits while minimizing negative impacts.
Renewable energy sector
In the renewable energy sector, MCDM methods can help select suitable sites for wind farms or solar power
plants by analyzing criteria such as wind speed, solar radiation, land use, and environmental impact. By doing
so, decision-makers can identify sites that optimize energy production while minimizing negative effects on the
environment.
Selecting landfill facilities
When selecting landfill facilities, MCDM methods can consider geology, hydrology, land use, and distance to
population centers. The aim is to choose sites that minimize negative environmental impacts and their effects
on nearby communities.
Industrial site selection
In industrial site selection, MCDM methods can analyze criteria like proximity to transportation networks,
access to utilities, and environmental impact to identify sites that maximize economic benefits while
minimizing negative environmental impacts on nearby communities.
Transportation infrastructure projects
For transportation infrastructure projects like highways or railroads, MCDM methods can evaluate traffic flow,
environmental impact, and access to population centers to identify sites that optimize transportation efficiency
while minimizing negative effects on the environment and nearby communities.
Ecological conservation
In ecological conservation, MCDM methods can help identify and prioritize sites for conservation and
restoration efforts. The criteria used may include biodiversity, habitat quality, and ecosystem services to select
sites with high conservation value and prioritize conservation efforts accordingly.

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2661]
Disaster risk reduction projects
MCDM methods can also aid in identifying and prioritizing sites for disaster risk reduction projects like flood
mitigation or landslide prevention. By considering vulnerability, exposure, and resilience, decision-makers can
identify sites that are most at risk and prioritize mitigation efforts accordingly.
VI. SUSTAINABILITY IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
Sustainability in renewable energy is a critical issue in today's world due to the growing demand for energy and
the depletion of non-renewable resources. Renewable energy sources offer sustainable solutions to meet the
increasing demand for energy while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts.
However, selecting and implementing renewable energy sources require a comprehensive approach that
considers various factors, such as economic, social, and environmental aspects. Multi-criteria decision-making
(MCDM) methods provide a structured and systematic way to evaluate and prioritize [40-41] renewable energy
alternatives based on multiple criteria. This article aims to explore sustainability in renewable energy using
MCDM methods, including their application, advantages, and limitations, as well as the challenges associated
with implementing renewable energy alternatives.
The use of renewable energy sources has significantly increased in recent decades due to the rising demand for
energy and concerns about climate change. Renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, hydro, and biomass
offer sustainable sources of energy that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts.
However, selecting renewable energy sources and their implementation require a comprehensive and holistic
approach that considers various factors, such as economic, social, and environmental aspects. MCDM methods
offer decision-making tools that help decision-makers evaluate and prioritize alternatives based on multiple
criteria. MCDM methods are decision-making tools that aid decision-makers in evaluating and prioritizing
alternatives based on multiple criteria. These methods can be classified into three categories: classical, fuzzy,
and stochastic. Classical MCDM methods include analytic hierarchy process (AHP), technique for order
preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), and weighted sum model (WSM). Fuzzy MCDM methods
include fuzzy AHP, fuzzy TOPSIS, and fuzzy integral. Stochastic MCDM methods include Monte Carlo simulation,
decision trees, and multi-objective programming.
A. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
AHP is a classical MCDM method that helps decision-makers evaluate and prioritize alternatives based on a
hierarchical structure of criteria. The AHP involves breaking down a complex decision problem into a
hierarchical structure of criteria and sub-criteria, and then comparing alternatives based on pairwise
comparisons of criteria using a scale from 1 to 9. The AHP provides a way to calculate the priority weights of
criteria and alternatives based on the pairwise comparisons [32]. The AHP has been widely used in renewable
energy studies to evaluate and prioritize renewable energy alternatives based on multiple criteria, such as
economic, environmental, and social criteria.
B. Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
TOPSIS is a classical MCDM method that helps decision-makers evaluate and prioritize alternatives based on
their distance from the ideal solution and the worst solution. TOPSIS involves calculating the distance of each
alternative from the ideal solution and the worst solution based on the criteria and then ranking the
alternatives based on their proximity to the ideal solution. TOPSIS provides a way to calculate the relative
closeness of alternatives to the ideal solution and the worst solution based on the criteria. TOPSIS has been
widely used in renewable energy studies to evaluate and prioritize renewable energy alternatives based on
multiple criteria, such as economic, environmental, and social criteria.
C. Weighted Sum Model (WSM)
WSM is a classical MCDM method that helps decision-makers evaluate and prioritize alternatives based on a
weighted sum of criteria. The WSM involves assigning weights to each criterion based on its relative
importance and then calculating the weighted sum of each alternative based on the criteria. The WSM provides
a way to calculate the overall score of each alternative based on the weighted sum of criteria. The WSM has
been widely used in renewable energy studies to evaluate and prioritize renewable energy alternatives based
on multiple criteria, such as economic, environmental, and social criteria

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2662]
D. Fuzzy AHP
Fuzzy AHP is a fuzzy MCDM method that enables decision-makers to evaluate and prioritize alternatives based
on a hierarchical structure of criteria. The method involves breaking down a complex decision problem into a
hierarchical structure of criteria and sub-criteria, and then comparing alternatives based on pairwise
comparisons of criteria using linguistic terms such as "very important," "important," "moderately important,"
"less important," and "not important." The fuzzy AHP calculates the priority weights of criteria and alternatives
based on the linguistic terms. This method is widely used in renewable energy studies to evaluate and prioritize
renewable energy alternatives based on multiple criteria, such as economic, environmental, and social criteria.
E. Fuzzy TOPSIS
Fuzzy TOPSIS is a fuzzy MCDM method that helps decision-makers evaluate and prioritize alternatives based on
their distance from the ideal solution and the worst solution, taking into account the imprecise nature of
criteria weights and performance ratings. The method calculates the fuzzy distance of each alternative from the
ideal solution and the worst solution based on the criteria and then ranks the alternatives based on their
proximity to the ideal solution. Fuzzy TOPSIS provides a way to calculate the relative closeness of alternatives
to the ideal solution and the worst solution based on the fuzzy distances. This method has been widely used in
renewable energy studies to evaluate and prioritize renewable energy alternatives based on multiple criteria,
such as economic, environmental, and social criteria [42].
Table 3: Applications of MCDM (Multiple Criteria Decision Making) methods in the context of
sustainability for renewable energy
Application MCDM Method Description
Site Selection
Analytic Hierarchy Process
(AHP)
Prioritizes potential locations for renewable energy projects
based on criteria such as land availability, environmental
impact, and cost-effectiveness.
Technology
Selection
Technique for Order
Preference by Similarity to
Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
Ranks different renewable energy technologies based on
criteria such as energy output, efficiency, and environmental
impact to identify the most sustainable option.
Investment
Analysis
Preference Ranking
Organization Method for
Enrichment Evaluations
(PROMETHEE)
Evaluates and ranks renewable energy investment
opportunities based on criteria such as cost-effectiveness,
financial viability, and social impact.
Policy
Evaluation
Elimination and Choice
Expressing Reality
(ELECTRE)
Compares renewable energy policies based on criteria such as
effectiveness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, cost-
effectiveness, and political feasibility to determine the most
sustainable option.
Supply Chain
Management
Data Envelopment
Analysis (DEA)
Assesses the sustainability of renewable energy supply chains
by evaluating their efficiency, environmental impact, and
social responsibility.
VII. SUSTAINABLE WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Effective and equitable use of the world's water resources depends on sustainable water resource management,
which is increasingly crucial with the rising population and water demand. To achieve this, decision-makers
need to manage water resources efficiently, and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is an essential tool for
this purpose. MCDM is a decision-making process that evaluates and prioritizes alternatives based on multiple
criteria or objectives [43]. Balancing water demand with the available water resources is a significant challenge
in sustainable water resource management. MCDM helps prioritize water use, ensuring urgent needs are met
while maintaining sustainable use of the resource. The tool also incorporates various criteria, including
economic, social, and environmental factors, necessary for sustainable water resource management. This helps
decision-makers make informed decisions that consider all relevant factors. MCDM can assess the trade-offs

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2663]
involved in different water use alternatives, providing decision-makers with the best option based on available
information. For instance, constructing a new dam or reservoir may increase water supply but have adverse
environmental impacts. MCDM can help evaluate the different trade-offs involved, leading to the best decision.
In promoting sustainability, MCDM can also prioritize the most effective water management strategies, such as
water conservation measures in urban areas and efficient irrigation systems in agriculture. Decision-makers
can evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies and identify those that provide the most significant
benefits. Stakeholder engagement and participation in decision-making are also critical in sustainable water
resource management. MCDM can involve stakeholders, including water users, local communities, and
environmental organizations, in the decision-making process, providing valuable input and feedback. This
ensures a transparent, inclusive, and stakeholder-oriented decision-making process, leading to effective
implementation of water management strategies.
MCDM is crucial in sustainable water resource management, providing a means to evaluate and prioritize
alternatives, assess trade-offs, prioritize management strategies, and enhance stakeholder engagement. Given
the increasing demand for water and the need for sustainable use, the use of MCDM in water resource
management will become even more critical in the coming years. Maintaining a balance between economic,
social, and environmental factors while preserving natural resources for future generations is the essence of
sustainability [43]. Groundwater is a vital resource for human activities such as drinking water, irrigation, and
industrial use. However, groundwater resources are susceptible to depletion and contamination due to human
activities and climate change. Thus, sustainable management of groundwater resources is necessary to ensure
their availability for future generations.
In complex systems involving multiple factors and stakeholders, Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) is a
useful tool for decision-making. MCDM techniques help identify the most suitable alternatives based on a set of
criteria and can aid sustainability assessments in groundwater potential zones. Groundwater potential zones
are areas with similar geological and hydrological characteristics that are likely to have high groundwater
potential. Identifying these zones is critical for groundwater management as it helps plan and design
appropriate groundwater extraction schemes. Achieving sustainability in groundwater potential zones involves
balancing the groundwater recharge and extraction rates, preventing contamination, and ensuring equitable
distribution among stakeholders. Several MCDM techniques can assess sustainability in groundwater potential
zones, with this essay focusing on three commonly used techniques: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and
Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS).
AHP is a widely used MCDM technique that ranks alternatives based on a set of criteria. It involves breaking
down a complex decision problem into a hierarchical structure of criteria and sub-criteria. The decision-maker
assigns weights to each criterion and sub-criterion based on their relative importance. Alternatives are then
evaluated against each criterion, and a score is assigned based on their performance. The final score of an
alternative is calculated by multiplying the scores of each criterion with their respective weights [35].
To assess sustainability in groundwater potential zones using AHP, the most suitable groundwater extraction
schemes are identified based on a set of criteria, such as groundwater recharge, groundwater extraction rates,
water quality, and equity in distribution [43]. The decision-maker assigns weights to each criterion based on
their relative importance. Alternatives, such as different groundwater extraction schemes, are then evaluated
against each criterion, and a score is assigned based on their performance. The final score of each alternative is
calculated by multiplying the scores of each criterion with their respective weights. The alternative with the
highest score is the most suitable for sustainable groundwater management.
TOPSIS is another MCDM technique that identifies the most suitable alternative based on a set of criteria by
ranking alternatives based on their distance from the ideal solution and the worst solution. The ideal solution
maximizes the benefits and minimizes the drawbacks, while the worst solution minimizes the benefits and
maximizes the drawbacks. The distance of an alternative from the ideal solution and the worst solution is
calculated using a mathematical formula.
To assess sustainability in groundwater potential zones using TOPSIS, the most suitable groundwater
extraction schemes are identified based on a set of criteria such as groundwater recharge, groundwater
extraction rates, water quality, and equity in distribution. The decision-maker defines the ideal solution and the

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2664]
worst solution based on these criteria. Alternatives, such as different groundwater extraction schemes, are then
evaluated based on their distance from the ideal solution and the worst solution. The alternative with the
closest distance to the ideal solution and the farthest distance from the worst solution is the most suitable for
sustainable groundwater management.
Table 4: Groundwater potential zones sustainability assessment
Sl. No. MCDM Method Application
1
Analytic Hierarchy Process
(AHP)
Identification of groundwater potential zones based on geological,
hydrogeological, and socio-economic criteria
2
Technique for Order of
Preference by Similarity to
Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
Ranking of groundwater potential zones based on multiple criteria,
including geology, hydrology, and socio-economic factors
3
Elimination and Choice
Expressing Reality
(ELECTRE)
Evaluation of groundwater potential zones based on geological,
hydrogeological, and socio-economic criteria
4
Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy
Process (FAHP)
Assessment of groundwater potential zones based on geology,
hydrogeology, and socio-economic factors
5
Fuzzy Technique for Order
of Preference by Similarity
to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS)
Ranking of groundwater potential zones based on multiple criteria,
including geology, hydrology, and socio-economic factors
6 Multi-Influence Factor (MIF)
Identification of groundwater potential zones based on multiple
criteria, including geology, hydrology, and topography
7 Frequency Ratio (FR)
Assessment of groundwater potential zones based on the ratio of
groundwater wells to total wells in an area
8 Weight of Evidence (WOE)
Identification of groundwater potential zones based on the
likelihood of certain geological and hydrological factors being
present in the area
VIII. SUSTAINABILITY IN WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Water is an essential but finite resource that must be managed efficiently for future generations. Achieving
sustainability in water quality management involves balancing social, economic, and environmental factors [5-
6]. To evaluate the trade-offs between these factors, a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach is often
used. This essay provides an overview of sustainability in water quality management, explains the MCDM
approach, and explores its application in water quality management. Sustainability in water quality
management means ensuring the availability of safe and clean water for all users while protecting the
environment and conserving water resources for the future. This involves balancing social factors such as
access to water for vulnerable populations, economic factors such as cost-effectiveness, and environmental
factors such as conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity.
MCDM evaluates and prioritizes alternatives based on multiple criteria or objectives. It involves problem
structuring, criteria selection, alternative evaluation, and decision-making. MCDM allows decision-makers to
evaluate trade-offs between competing objectives and select the most sustainable solution. [2-5]. MCDM has
been applied in water quality management to evaluate the sustainability of water treatment technologies, water
reuse strategies, and water allocation policies. For example, MCDM has been used to evaluate the sustainability
of different water treatment technologies, with membrane filtration identified as the most sustainable
technology. MCDM has also been used to evaluate the sustainability of water reuse strategies, with greywater
reuse identified as the most sustainable. In addition, MCDM has been used to evaluate the sustainability of
water allocation policies, with policies based on ecological flow and social equity identified as the most
sustainable.

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2665]
However, there are challenges and limitations to using MCDM in water quality management, such as data
availability and the complexity of the decision-making process. Nevertheless, MCDM remains a valuable tool for
achieving sustainability in water quality management by enabling decision-makers to evaluate trade-offs
between competing objectives and select the most sustainable solution. Managing water quality is a
complicated process that considers various factors such as environmental, social, economic, and institutional
aspects. To help in decision-making, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are commonly used to
assess and compare different criteria to determine the most suitable water quality management strategies.
Several MCDM methods are applied in water quality management, including Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP),
Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Simple Additive Weighting (SAW),
Weighted Sum Model (WSM), and Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la Realite (ELECTRE) method.
AHP involves breaking down a complex problem into a hierarchical structure of criteria and sub-criteria. It is a
flexible method that is widely applicable but requires expertise and careful consideration of criteria and
weights [35].
TOPSIS aims to identify the alternative that is closest to the ideal solution based on a set of criteria. It is easy to
understand and apply but assumes equal importance among the criteria, which may not represent stakeholder
preferences accurately [38].
SAW is a simple and user-friendly method that assigns weights to each criterion and calculates a score for each
alternative. It may not consider interactions between the criteria and stakeholder preferences accurately.
ELECTRE is a preference-based method that ranks alternatives based on their relative closeness to the ideal
solution and their distance from unacceptable solutions. It is flexible and considers incomplete information, but
determining criteria weights and thresholds requires expertise.
Choosing the appropriate MCDM method depends on problem characteristics, stakeholder preferences, and
available resources. MCDM methods are useful tools for water quality managers to make informed decisions by
evaluating and comparing different criteria involved in water quality management.
IX. SUSTAINABILITY IN AGRICULTURE
Sustainability in agriculture refers to the capacity of agricultural practices to meet the needs of present and
future generations while preserving environmental, social, and economic resources. To evaluate the
sustainability of agricultural practices based on multiple criteria, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is a
useful approach that involves the use of mathematical models and algorithms. To apply MCDM to assess the
sustainability of agricultural practices, the first step is to identify the alternatives that will be evaluated, such as
different farming systems, crops, or management practices. The next step is to identify the relevant criteria and
sub-criteria that will be used to evaluate the alternatives. These criteria should reflect the values and priorities
of the stakeholders involved, and may include factors such as environmental impact, social equity, economic
viability, and technological feasibility.
Once the criteria have been identified, they must be weighted to reflect their relative importance. Various
methods can be used for this, such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) or the Simple Additive Weighting
(SAW) method. After weighting the criteria, the alternatives can be evaluated and ranked based on their
performance on each criterion. This can be done using different techniques, such as the Technique for Order of
Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) or the Preference Ranking Organization Method for
Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE).
The results of the MCDM analysis can provide valuable insights into the sustainability of different agricultural
practices and help stakeholders make informed decisions about which practices to adopt. By using MCDM to
evaluate the sustainability of agricultural practices, stakeholders can ensure that their decisions are based on a
comprehensive and objective analysis of the available alternatives.
Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) has found various applications in agriculture to aid decision-makers in
making informed choices by considering multiple criteria simultaneously. Here are some examples of how
MCDM has been utilized in agriculture:
 Crop selection: MCDM methods help in selecting the most appropriate crop to be grown in a particular
region by considering criteria such as yield, market value, water requirement, and climate suitability.

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2666]
 Irrigation system selection: MCDM methods assist in selecting the most suitable irrigation system for a
specific crop by analyzing factors such as water availability, soil type, crop water requirements, and cost.
 Land-use planning: MCDM methods have been used in evaluating various land-use scenarios by taking into
account factors such as soil quality, water availability, climate suitability, and socio-economic considerations.
 Pesticide selection: MCDM methods help in choosing the most effective pesticide for a particular crop by
considering criteria such as effectiveness, cost, environmental impact, and health risks.
 Livestock management: MCDM methods help in evaluating different livestock management practices by
taking into account criteria such as animal health, productivity, and environmental impact.
 Agroforestry planning: MCDM methods are used to assess the benefits of agroforestry practices by
analyzing criteria such as soil conservation, carbon sequestration, and economic returns.
Overall, MCDM is a useful tool in agriculture to assist decision-makers in making more informed choices by
taking into account multiple criteria simultaneously.
X. SUSTAINABILITY IN MATERIAL SELECTION
Modern engineering design requires a focus on sustainability, as engineers must produce products with
minimal environmental impact while still meeting customer needs [1,3]. One approach to achieving this is
through the selection of sustainable materials. Material selection is a crucial step in the engineering design
process, and sustainability factors must be considered in this process. This article explores the use of Multiple
Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques in selecting sustainable materials. Sustainable materials are those
that have a minimal negative impact on the environment and can be used for extended periods without
significant depletion. Examples of sustainable materials include bamboo, hemp, recycled steel, and reclaimed
wood, which are preferred over traditional materials such as plastic due to their negative impact on the
environment. MCDM is a decision-making approach that involves assessing and analyzing multiple criteria
simultaneously to determine the best alternative. In material selection, MCDM can be used to evaluate and
compare different materials based on their sustainability criteria. There are different MCDM techniques
available, including Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to
Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation
(PROMETHEE).
AHP is a popular MCDM technique that involves breaking down a complex decision problem into a hierarchy of
smaller and more manageable sub-problems [35]. In material selection, AHP can be used to evaluate different
materials based on their sustainability criteria. The process involves identifying the sustainability criteria,
breaking them down into a hierarchy of sub-criteria, assigning weights to each criterion and sub-criterion, and
conducting pairwise comparisons to determine their relative importance. The pairwise comparisons are used
to calculate the priority vector for each criterion and sub-criterion, which is used to determine the overall score
for each material.
TOPSIS is another MCDM technique that involves evaluating different alternatives based on their distance to
the ideal solution and the worst solution. In material selection, TOPSIS can be used to compare different
materials based on their sustainability criteria. The process involves identifying the sustainability criteria,
normalizing them to a common scale, weighting the criteria, and calculating the positive and negative ideal
solutions. The distance of each alternative to the positive and negative ideal solutions is then calculated, and the
score for each alternative is determined by the ratio of the distance to the positive ideal solution to the sum of
the distances to the positive and negative ideal solutions [38].
XI. HYBRID MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING (MCDM) METHODS FOR
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The integration of multiple criteria to evaluate alternative options is facilitated by Hybrid Multi-Criteria
Decision-Making (MCDM) methods, which are particularly useful in sustainable development to balance
economic, social, and environmental criteria. MCDM methods enable decision-makers to evaluate trade-offs
between different options and make informed decisions, as these criteria may be conflicting and difficult to
reconcile.

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2667]
One common MCDM method is the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which uses a hierarchical structure to
represent the criteria and alternatives and assigns weights to each element based on their relative importance
[34,35]. Integrated evaluations can also be conducted for the multi modal transportation [44]. Another method
is the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), which calculates the distance
between each alternative and ideal and negative ideal solutions to determine a score for each option.
Table 5: hybrid MCDM methods and its application
Sl. No. Hybrid MCDM Application
1 AHP-TOPSIS
Suitable for decision-making that requires both criteria weighting and
ranking of alternatives based on their distance to the ideal solution. Often
used in areas such as business, engineering, and environmental management
2 AHP-Entropy
Ideal for decision-making problems with incomplete or uncertain data. Often
used in fields such as environmental science, transportation planning, and
healthcare.
3 Fuzzy-AHP
Appropriate for decision-making with imprecise or ambiguous information.
Often used in fields such as finance, transportation, and energy management.
4
ELECTRE III-
TOPSIS
Used to address decision-making problems with multiple conflicting criteria.
Often applied in areas such as supply chain management, transportation
planning, and environmental management.
5
VIKOR-
DEMATEL
Ideal for decision-making problems with multiple criteria and alternatives.
Often applied in fields such as finance, transportation, and environmental
management.
6
AHP-TOPSIS-
PROMETHEE II
Useful for complex decision-making problems with multiple criteria and
alternatives. Often used in areas such as healthcare, energy management, and
environmental management.
Hybrid MCDM methods combine multiple techniques to provide a more robust decision-making framework.
For instance, the Hybrid AHP-TOPSIS method combines AHP and TOPSIS to determine criteria and alternative
weights and rank alternatives based on their distance to the ideal solution. MCDM methods are particularly
useful for evaluating the trade-offs between economic, social, and environmental criteria in sustainable
development. For example, decision-makers may need to balance economic growth with environmental
conservation. Additionally, MCDM methods can assess the long-term impacts of different options and identify
potential risks and uncertainties.
Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods are powerful tools for sustainable development that
enable decision-makers to identify the most sustainable options and evaluate the trade-offs between economic,
social, and environmental criteria. Hybrid MCDM methods combine multiple techniques to overcome individual
method limitations and provide a more comprehensive decision-making framework.
XII. CONCLUSION
This research paper delves into the significance of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods in
promoting sustainable development. It examines the advantages and limitations of popular MCDM methods
such as AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR and provides a comparative analysis of their effectiveness in
decision-making for sustainability. The paper also explores the implementation of sustainable practices in
several fields, including construction, business, finance, accounting, industry, site selection, renewable energy,
water resource management, water quality management, agriculture, and material selection.
The study emphasizes the importance of adopting a holistic approach in sustainable management that
considers economic, environmental, and social dimensions. Traditional decision-making methods often fail to
address the complexity and uncertainty associated with sustainable management, which MCDM methods can
help address. MCDM methods enable decision-makers to identify the best course of action based on multiple
criteria and can help them understand the relationships between different criteria, assess the impact of

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2668]
different decisions on sustainability outcomes, and make more informed and robust decisions. The comparative
analysis conducted in this study reveals that each MCDM method has its strengths and limitations, and its
effectiveness depends on the specific context and criteria involved in the decision-making process. For example,
AHP and FAHP methods are effective in handling subjective and qualitative data, such as social and
environmental criteria, and can provide decision-makers with a clear hierarchy of priorities. On the other hand,
TOPSIS is suitable for dealing with quantitative data and can rank alternatives based on their proximity to the
ideal solution. ELECTRE is effective in handling conflicting and non-commensurable criteria and can provide a
range of acceptable solutions. Lastly, VIKOR is useful in dealing with both quantitative and qualitative data and
can provide a compromise solution that satisfies conflicting criteria.
Therefore, it is important to carefully consider the specific context and criteria involved when selecting and
applying a particular MCDM method to ensure that the decision-making process is effective in promoting
sustainable outcomes. In conclusion, this research paper highlights the need for effective decision-making
frameworks for sustainable development and provides insights for policymakers, researchers, and
practitioners in the field of sustainability. The study suggests that the implementation of MCDM methods and
sustainable practices can contribute to a more sustainable future, benefiting both the environment and society.
XIII. REFERENCES
[1] Stojčić, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Mardani, A. (2019). Application of MCDM methods
in sustainability engineering: A literature review 2008–2018. Symmetry, 11(3), 350.
[2] Chowdhury, P., & Paul, S. K. (2020). Applications of MCDM methods in research on corporate
sustainability: A systematic literature review. Management of Environmental Quality: An International
Journal.
[3] Kumar, A., Sah, B., Singh, A. R., Deng, Y., He, X., Kumar, P., & Bansal, R. C. (2017). A review of multi
criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 596-609.
[4] Tsai, W. H., Chou, W. C., & Hsu, W. (2009). The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for
selecting socially responsible investment: an effective MCDM model. Journal of the Operational
Research Society, 60, 1396-1410.
[5] Zolfani, S. H., Pourhossein, M., Yazdani, M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2018). Evaluating construction projects
of hotels based on environmental sustainability with MCDM framework. Alexandria engineering
journal, 57(1), 357-365.
[6] Anand, A., Rufuss, D. D. W., Rajkumar, V., & Suganthi, L. (2017). Evaluation of sustainability indicators in
smart cities for India using MCDM approach. Energy Procedia, 141, 211-215.
[7] Ghorabaee, M. K., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2018). A new hybrid fuzzy MCDM
approach for evaluation of construction equipment with sustainability considerations. Archives of Civil
and Mechanical Engineering, 18, 32-49.
[8] Mulliner, E., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2016). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the
assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega, 59, 146-156.
[9] Zhao, H., & Guo, S. (2014). Selecting green supplier of thermal power equipment by using a hybrid
MCDM method for sustainability. Sustainability, 6(1), 217-235.
[10] Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European journal of
operational research, 95(3), 649-655.
[11] Krohling, R. A., & Pacheco, A. G. (2015). A-TOPSIS–an approach based on TOPSIS for ranking
evolutionary algorithms. Procedia Computer Science, 55, 308-317.
[12] Rane, N. L., & Attarde, P. M. (2016). Application of value engineering in commercial building projects.
International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology, 6(3), 286-291.
[13] Al-Harbi, K. M. A. S. (2001). Application of the AHP in project management. International journal of
project management, 19(1), 19-27.

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2669]
[14] Rane, N., & Jayaraj, G. K. (2021). Stratigraphic modeling and hydraulic characterization of a typical
basaltic aquifer system in the Kadva river basin, Nashik, India. Modeling Earth Systems and
Environment, 7, 293-306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-01008-0
[15] Rane, N. L., & Jayaraj, G. K. (2022). Comparison of multi-influence factor, weight of evidence and
frequency ratio techniques to evaluate groundwater potential zones of basaltic aquifer systems.
Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(2), 2315-2344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-
021-01535-5
[16] Rane, N., & Jayaraj, G. K. (2021). Evaluation of multiwell pumping aquifer tests in unconfined aquifer
system by Neuman (1975) method with numerical modeling. In Groundwater resources development
and planning in the semi-arid region (pp. 93-106). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68124-1_5
[17] Aziz, N. F., Sorooshian, S., & Mahmud, F. (2016). MCDM-AHP method in decision makings. ARPN Journal
of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 11(11), 7217-7220.
[18] Asadabadi, M. R., Chang, E., & Saberi, M. (2019). Are MCDM methods useful? A critical review of analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) and analytic network process (ANP). Cogent Engineering, 6(1), 1623153.
[19] Souissi, D., Zouhri, L., Hammami, S., Msaddek, M. H., Zghibi, A., & Dlala, M. (2020). GIS-based MCDM–
AHP modeling for flood susceptibility mapping of arid areas, southeastern Tunisia. Geocarto
International, 35(9), 991-1017.
[20] Sisay, G., Gebre, S. L., & Getahun, K. (2021). GIS-based potential landfill site selection using MCDM-AHP
modeling of Gondar Town, Ethiopia. African Geographical Review, 40(2), 105-124.
[21] Nguyen, H. T., Md Dawal, S. Z., Nukman, Y., P. Rifai, A., & Aoyama, H. (2016). An integrated MCDM model
for conveyor equipment evaluation and selection in an FMC based on a fuzzy AHP and fuzzy ARAS in
the presence of vagueness. PloS one, 11(4), e0153222.
[22] Shim, J. P. (1989). Bibliographical research on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Socio-Economic
Planning Sciences, 23(3), 161-167.
[23] Zolfani, S. H., Chen, I. S., Rezaeiniya, N., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2012). A hybrid MCDM model encompassing
AHP and COPRAS-G methods for selecting company supplier in Iran. Technological and economic
development of economy, 18(3), 529-543.
[24] de FSM Russo, R., & Camanho, R. (2015). Criteria in AHP: a systematic review of literature. Procedia
Computer Science, 55, 1123-1132.
[25] Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Ameyaw, E. E., Owusu, E. K., Pärn, E., & Edwards, D. J. (2019). Review of
application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction. International journal of construction
management, 19(5), 436-452.
[26] Ossadnik, W., & Lange, O. (1999). AHP-based evaluation of AHP-Software. European journal of
[27] Saaty, T. L. (1990). An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “remarks on the analytic hierarchy
process”. Management science, 36(3), 259-268.
[28] Rane, N. L., Anand, A., Deepak K., (2023). Evaluating the Selection Criteria of Formwork System (FS) for
RCC Building Construction. International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, vol. 71, no. 3,
pp. 197-205. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V71I3P220
[29] Achari, A., Rane, N. L., Gangar B., (2023). Framework Towards Achieving Sustainable Strategies for
Water Usage and Wastage in Building Construction. International Journal of Engineering Trends and
Technology, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 385-394. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-
V71I3P241
[30] Rane, N. L., (2016). Application of value engineering techniques in building construction projects.
International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Technology, 5(7).

e-ISSN: 2582-5208
[2670]
[31] Rane, N., Lopes, S., Raval, A., Rumao, D., & Thakur, M. P. (2017). Study of effects of labour productivity
on construction projects. International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Research Technology, 6(6),
15-20.
[32] Moharir, K. N., Pande, C. B., Gautam, V. K., Singh, S. K., & Rane, N. L. (2023). Integration of
hydrogeological data, GIS and AHP techniques applied to delineate groundwater potential zones in
sandstone, limestone and shales rocks of the Damoh district, (MP) central India. Environmental
Research, 115832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.115832
[33] Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European journal of
[34] Wei, C. C., Chien, C. F., & Wang, M. J. J. (2005). An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection.
International journal of production economics, 96(1), 47-62.
[35] Teknomo, K. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) tutorial. Revoledu. com, 6(4), 1-20.
[36] Ishizaka, A., & Lusti, M. (2006). How to derive priorities in AHP: a comparative study. Central European
Journal of Operations Research, 14, 387-400.
[37] Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary.
European journal of operational research, 145(1), 85-91.
[38] Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS
applications. Expert Systems with applications, 39(17), 13051-13069.
[39] Lai, Y. J., Liu, T. Y., & Hwang, C. L. (1994). Topsis for MODM. European journal of operational research,
76(3), 486-500.
[40] Olson, D. L. (2004). Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models. Mathematical and Computer Modelling,
40(7-8), 721-727.
[41] Nădăban, S., Dzitac, S., & Dzitac, I. (2016). Fuzzy TOPSIS: a general view. Procedia computer science, 91,
823-831.
[42] Ren, L., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., & Sun, Z. (2007). Comparative analysis of a novel M-TOPSIS method and
TOPSIS. Applied Mathematics Research eXpress, 2007.
[43] Machiwal, D., Jha, M. K., & Mal, B. C. (2011). Assessment of groundwater potential in a semi-arid region
of India using remote sensing, GIS and MCDM techniques. Water resources management, 25, 1359-
1386.
[44] Choudhary, S. P., Achari, A., (2023) Need for Integrated Multi-Modal Transportation in India,
International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 10 (1), 143-148, Available at :
http://www.ijrar.org/IJRAR23A1273.pdf

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) as a powerful tool for sustainable development: Effective applications of AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR in sustainability

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) as a powerful tool for sustainable development: Effective applications of AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR in sustainability

Ähnlich wie Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) as a powerful tool for sustainable development: Effective applications of AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR in sustainability (20)

Mehr von nitinrane33

Mehr von nitinrane33 (12)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) as a powerful tool for sustainable development: Effective applications of AHP, FAHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, and VIKOR in sustainability