Page 224 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

222 10. Advancing life cycle sustainability assessment using multiple criteria decision making

Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (Eds.), 2005. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. vol. 78.
Springer Science & Business Media.
Finkbeiner, M., Schau, E.M., Lehmann, A., Traverso, M., 2010. Towards life cycle sustainability assessment.
Sustainability 2 (10), 3309–3322.
Foolmaun, R.K., Ramjeawon, T., 2013. Life cycle sustainability assessments (LCSA) of four disposal scenarios for used
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 15 (3), 783–806.
French, S., 1986. Decision Theory: An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality. Halsted Press.
Godskesen, B., Hauschild, M., Albrechtsen, H.J., Rygaard, M., 2018. ASTA—a method for multi-criteria evaluation of
water supply technologies to assess the most sustainable alternative for Copenhagen. Sci. Total Environ.
618, 399–408.
Greco, S., Figueira, J., Ehrgott, M., 2016. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Springer, New York.
Guin ee, J., 2016. Life cycle sustainability assessment: what is it and what are its challenges? In: Taking stock of indus-
trial ecology. Springer, Cham, pp. 45–68.
Guitouni, A., Martel, J.M., 1998. Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. Eur. J. Oper.
Res. 109 (2), 501–521.
Gumus, S., Kucukvar, M., Tatari, O., 2016. Intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria decision making framework based on life
cycle environmental, economic and social impacts: the case of US wind energy. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 8, 78–92.
Halog, A., Manik, Y., 2011. Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assess-
ment. Sustainability 3 (2), 469–499.
Hannouf, M., Assefa, G., 2017. Life cycle sustainability assessment for sustainability improvements: a case study of
high-density polyethylene production in Alberta, Canada. Sustainability 9 (12), 2332.
Hannouf, M., Assefa, G., 2018. A life cycle sustainability assessment-based decision-analysis framework.
Sustainability 10 (11), 3863.
Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M.A., 2004. A Review of Approaches to Treat Uncertainty in LCA. Elsevier, Osnabr€ uck,
Germany.
Hobbs, B.F., 1980. A comparison of weighting methods in power plant siting. Decis. Sci. 11 (4), 725–737.
Hossaini, N., Reza, B., Akhtar, S., Sadiq, R., Hewage, K., 2015. AHP based life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA)
framework: a case study of six storey wood frame and concrete frame buildings in Vancouver. J. Environ. Plan.
Manag. 58 (7), 1217–1241.
Huber, J., Payne, J.W., Puto, C., 1982. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: violations of regularity and the
similarity hypothesis. J. Consum. Res. 9 (1), 90–98.
Huppes, G., van Oers, L., 2011. Background Review of Existing Weighting Approaches in Life Cycle Impact Assess-
ment (LCIA). Luxembourg, European Union.
Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: A State of the Art Survey. Lecture Notes in Eco-
nomics and Mathematical Systems, vol. 186. Palgrave Macmillan, United Kingdom
Kahraman, C., Onar, S.C., Oztaysi, B., 2015. Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. Int. J. Comput.
Intell. Syst. 8 (4), 637–666.
Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar, S., Asolekar, S.R., 2012. Selection of an appropriate wastewater treatment technology: a
scenario-based multiple-attribute decision-making approach. J. Environ. Manag. 113, 158–169.
Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar, S., Asolekar, S.R., 2013. The influence of expert opinions on the selection of wastewater treat-
ment alternatives: a group decision-making approach. J. Environ. Manag. 128, 844–851.
Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar, S., Asolekar, S.R., 2015. Selection of wastewater treatment alternative: significance of choosing
MADM method. Environ. Eng. Manage. J. 14(5).
Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar, S., Asolekar, S.R., 2016. Life cycle-based decision support tool for selection of wastewater
treatment alternatives. J. Clean. Prod. 117, 64–72.
Kalbar, P.P., Birkved, M., Nygaard, S.E., Hauschild, M., 2017a. Weighting and aggregation in life cycle assessment: do
present aggregated single scores provide correct decision support? J. Ind. Ecol. 21 (6), 1591–1600.
Kalbar, P., Birkved, M., Elsborg Nygaard, S., Hauschild, M., 2017b. Response to comment on “weighting and aggre-
gation in life cycle assessment: do present aggregated single scores provide correct decision support?”. J. Ind. Ecol.
21 (6), 1603–1605.
Kleijnen, J.P., 1994. Sensitivity analysis versus uncertainty analysis: when to use what? In: Predictability and
Nonlinear Modelling in Natural Sciences and Economics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 322–333.
Kunifuji, S., Papadopoulos, G.A., Skulimowski, A.M., Kacprzyk, J., 2016. Knowledge, Information and Creativity
Support Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg