AN INTEGRATED DEA/AHP METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING THE CRITERIA OF IMPORTANCE IN THE PROCESS OF BUSINESS-FRIENDLY CERTIFICATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL

Milan Randjelović, Gordana Savić, Boban Stojanović, Dragan Randjelović

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME180614021R
First page
285
Last page
300

Abstract


The key problem in the application of multi-criteria decision methods is to determine the importance of the criteria.  That is the reason for the developing of a number of approaches for its calculation. Most of the used classifications divide them into two groups: subjective and objective. This  paper presents an integration, an analytic  hierarchy process (AHP) method as a subjective one, and the data envelopment analysis (DEA) method as an objective approach. The basic idea in the proposed procedure is to introduce objectivity into the process of criteria importance derivation with AHP by taking into account the weight obtained by DEA efficiency evaluation after introducing subjectivity in DEA, with an expert opinion.


Keywords

Multi-criteria decision, criteria weights, business-friendly certification, AHP, DEA.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alonso, J. A., & Lamata, T. (2006). Consistency In The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A New Approach. International Journal of Uncertainty,Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(4), 445−459.

Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Sciences, 30, 1078-1092.

Bfcsee (2014). http://www.bfcsee.org/Certification_criteria

Bozoki, S. (2008). Solution of the Least Squares Method problem of pairwise comparison matrices.European Journal of Operational Research (EJOR), 16, 345-358.

Certification program business-friendly municipality (2012). http://www.naled serbia.org/documents/download/Certification_brochure_2012.pdf

Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444

Chen H. J., & Bai, J. F. (2013). Weight Determination Method Based on Principal Component Analysis Coking. Advanced Materials Research, Vol. (712-715), 2469-2473.

Cooper, W.W., Seiford L.M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software. Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Cooper, W., Seiford, L.M., & Tone, K. (2006). Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and its Uses with DEA-Solver Software and References. New York: Springer.

Doyle, J., & Green, R. (1993). Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision-making. Omega, 21(6), 713–715.

FormanE.H. (1990). Random indices for Incomplete Pairwise Comparison Matrices, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 153-155.

Ginevičius R., & Podvezko, V. (2004). Objective and subjective approaches to determining the criterion weight in multicriteria models. Proceedings of International Conference RelStat’ 04, Part 1, Riga, Latvia, p. 133-137.

Hwang, C. L., Yoon, K. (1981).Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Berlin: Springer.

Jahanshahloo, G.R., Zohrehbandian M., & Abbasian-Naghneh, S. (2011). Using Interactive Multiobjective Methods to Solve Multiple Attribute Decision Making Problems.Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(9), 298-308.

Leskinen, P. (2000). Measurement scales and scale independence in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Multi–Criteria Decision Analysis, 9, 163–174.

Li, D.F., Chen, G.H., & Huang, Z.G. (2013). Linear programming method for multiattribute group decision making using IF sets. Information Sciences, v180 i9, 1591-1609.

Liu, F.H.F., & Hai, H.L. (2005). The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier. International Journal of Production Economics, 97(3), 308–317.

Liu, Chun-Chu. (2003). Simulating Weights Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis by the Subjective and Objective Integrated Approach. Web Journal of Chinese Management Review, 6(1), 68-78.

Ma, J., Fan, Z.P., & Huang, L.H. (1999). A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights. European Journal of Operational Research, 112, 397-404.

Ma, J., & Zhang, Q. (1991). 9/9-9/1 scale method of the AHP. Proceedings of 2nd Int. Symposium on the AHP,Pittsburgh, USA, Vol. 1, p. 197-202.

Naled-serbia (2012). http://www.naled-serbia.org

Podinovski, V. V. (1999). Side effects of absolute weight bounds in DEA models. EJOR, 115, 583-595.

Radukic, S., Stankovic J., & Popovic, Z. (2012). The Goals and Limitations of Multicriteria Models of Environmental Protection, Economic Themes, 4, 669-681.

Ranđelović, D., Ranđelović, M., Savić, G., & Makajić-Nikolić, D. (2013). Aggregation Statistics and the Methods of Operational Research for Weighting Criteria in Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Metalurgia International, Vol XVIII(4), 111-119.

Ramanathan, R. (2006). Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process.Computers and Operations Research, 33, 1289–1307.

Saaty, T. L. (1994). Fundamentals of Decision Making.Pittsburgh:RWS Publications.

Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234-281.

Saaty, T.L. (1980). Multi-criteria decision making: the Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Savić, G., Makajić-Nikolić, D., Ranđelović, D.,&Ranđelović, M. (2013). Study Program Selection by Aggregated DEA-AHP Measure. Metalurgia International, 18 (1), 169-174.

Seifert, L.M., Zhu, J. (1998). Identifying excesses and deficits in Chinese industrial productivity (1953–1990): a weighted data envelopment analysis approach. Omega, 26(2), 279–396.

Shang, J., & Sueyoshi, T. (1995). A unified framework for the selection of a flexible manufacturing system. European Journal of Operational Research, 85(2), 297–315.

Shannon C. E.,& Weaver, W. (1947). The Mathematical Theory of Communication Urbana. Illionois: The University of Illinois Presss.

Sinuany-Stern, Z., Abraham, M., & Yossi, H. (2000). An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units.International Trans. in Operational Research, 7(2), 109–124.

Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia, Municipalities and Regions in the Republic of Serbia in 2012 (2012). http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/WebSite/repository/documents/00/00/54/08/OpstinskigodisnjakRepublike_Srbije_2011.zip

Wang, Y.M., Liu, Y., & Elhag, T.M.S. (2008). An integrated AHP–DEA methodology for bridge risk Assessment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54 (3), 513-525.

Yang,T., & Chunwei, K. A. (2003). A hierarchical AHP/DEA methodology for the facilities layout design problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 128-136.

Zionts, S. (1992) Some thoughts on research in multiple criteria decision making. Computers and Operations Research, 19(7), 567–637.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME180614021R

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


© University of Niš, Serbia
Creative Commons licence CC BY-NC-ND
Print ISSN: 0353-7919
Online ISSN: 1820-7804