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

Daeryong Park, Yeonjoo Kim, Myoung-Jin Um and Sung-Uk Choi
Additional contact information
Daeryong Park: Department of Civil and Environmental System Engineering, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Korea
Yeonjoo Kim: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea
Myoung-Jin Um: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea
Sung-Uk Choi: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea

Sustainability, 2015, vol. 7, issue 8, 1-17

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.

Keywords: AHP; binomial distribution; compromise programming; electre III; incomplete information; multi-criteria decision making; priority; promethee II; uniform distribution (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/8/10233/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/8/10233/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:8:p:10233-10249:d:53476

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().