PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2020 | 13 | nr 4 | 256--266
Tytuł artykułu

Multi-criteria Assessment of Socioeconomic Systems' Conditions Based on Hierarchically Structured Indicator Systems

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
The adequacy of multi-criteria assessment largely depends on how comprehensively an indicator system reflects a phenomenon under consideration. If the number of indicators is large, experts cannot adequately evaluate the indicator weights. As a result, the scope of calculations increases significantly, but the accuracy drops. This problem can be solved by forming a hierarchically structured indicator system. Multi-criteria assessment of such systems is started from the lowest hierarchical level where the values of the related indicator groups are estimated, and then they turn into the indices of a higher hierarchical level. Same procedure is repeated until a value representing the condition of a phenomenon under consideration is obtained. (original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
13
Numer
Strony
256--266
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
Bibliografia
  • Atta Mills, E. F. E., Baafi, M. A., Amowine, N., & Zeng, K. (2020). A hybrid grey MCDM approach for asset allocation: evidence from China's Shanghai Stock Exchange. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(2), 446-472. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.11967
  • Babu, S., & Datta, S. (2015). Revisiting the link between socio-economic development and environmental status indicators focus on panel data. Environment Development and Sustainability, 17(3), 567-586. doi:10.1007/s10668-014-9561-6
  • Benayoun, R., Roy, B., & Sussman, B. (1966). Electre: Une méthode pour guider le choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Note de travail, 49, SEMA-METRA International Direction Scientifique.
  • Bilan Y., Mishchuk, H., Roshchyk, I. & Kmecova I. (2020). Analysis of Intellectual Potential and its Impact on the Social and Economic Development of European Countries. Journal of Competitiveness, 1, 22-38. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2020.01.02
  • Bilan, Y., Vasilyeva, T., Lyeonov, S., & Bagmet, K. (2019). Institutional complementarity for social and economic development. Business: Theory and Practice, 20, 103-115. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2019.10
  • Bobenič Hintošová, A., Bruothová, M., Kubíková, Z., & Ručinský R. (2018). Determinants of foreign direct investment inflows: A case of the Visegrad countries. Journal of International Studies, 11(2), 222-235. doi:10.14254/2071- 8330.2018/11-2/15
  • Boggia, A., Rocchi, L., Paolotti, L., Musotti, F., & Greco, S. (2014). Assessing rural sustainable development potentialities using a dominance-based rough set approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 144, 160-167.
  • Brans, J. P., Mareschal, B., & Vincke, Ph. (1984). PROMETHEE: A new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. In Operational Research' 84. (J. P. Brans, Ed.) North Holland: Elsever Science Publishers B. V.
  • Brans, J. P., Vincke, Ph., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2), 228-238. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5
  • Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2006). The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy. Control and Cybernetics, 35(2), 443-468.
  • Chowolhury, S., & Squire, L. (2006). Setting weights for aggregate indices: an application to the commitment to development index and human development index. Journal of Development Studies, 42(5), 761-771.
  • Gedvilaitė, D. (2019). The assessment of sustainable development of a country's regions. Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius: Technika.
  • Ginevicius, R. (2019). Quantitative Assessment of the Compatibility of the Development of Socioeconomic Systems. Journal of Competitiveness, 11(2), 36-50. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2019.02.03
  • Ginevičius, R. (2009). Some problems of quantitative evaluation of the state of social-economic systems. Business: Theory and Practice, 10(2), 69-83.
  • Ginevičius, R., & Podvezko, V. (2004). Įmonių strateginio potencialo kiekybinis vertinimas. (Quantitative Evaluation of the Strategic Potential of Enterprises). Verslas: teorija ir praktika - Business: Theory and Practice, V(1), 3-9.
  • Ginevičius, R., & Podvezko, V. (2007). Some problems of evaluating multicriteria decision methods. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 8(5/6), 527-539.
  • Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Methods and Application a State-of-the-Art Survey. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 186. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
  • Jacquet-Lagreze, E., & Siskos, J. (1982). Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 10(2), 151-164. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(82)90155-2
  • Kostiukevych, R., Mishchuk, H., Zhidebekkyzy, A., Nakonieczny, J., & Akimov, O. (2020). The impact of European integration processes on the investment potential and institutional maturity of rural communities. Economics and Sociology, 13(3), 46-63. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2020/13-3/3
  • McLaren, D., Bullock, S., & Yousef, N. (1998). Tomorrow's world: Britain's share in a sustainable future. London.
  • Molly, K. M. (2018). Regional differences in Slovenia from the viewpoint of achieving Europe's sustainable development. Acta Geographica Slovenia, 58(2), 2-46.
  • Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Mousakhani, S., Tavakoli, M., Dalvand, M. R., Šaparauskas, J., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2020). Importance-performance analysis based balanced scorecard for performance evaluation in higher education institutions: an integrated fuzzy approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(3), 647-678. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.11940
  • Oláh, J., Krisán, E., Kiss, A., Lakner, Z., & Popp, J. (2020). PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews of the Bioethanol Sector. Energies, 13(9), 2323, 1-34., https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092323
  • Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems. Belgrade, Serbia: Faculty of Civil Engineering.
  • Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
  • Oželienė, D. (2019). Modelling the factors of a company's sustainable development. Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius: Technika.
  • Popp, J., Békefi, E., Duleba, S., & Oláh, J. (2019). Multifunctionality of pond fish farms in the opinion of the farm managers: the case of Hungary. Reviews in Aquaculture, 11(3), 830-847. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12260
  • Roubens, M. (1982). Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 10(1), 51-55. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(82)90131-X
  • Roy, B. (1988). Des critéresmultiples en recherche opérationnelle: Pourquoi? In G. K. Rand (ed.), Operational Research, 87. Amsterdam, North Holland.
  • Roy, B. (1991). The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision, 31, 49-73. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00134132
  • Roy, B. (1996). Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Dordrecht, Netherlands; Boston, Mass: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234-281. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Saaty, T. L., Vargas, L. G., & Dellmann, K. (2003). The allocation of intangible resources: the analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 37(3), 169-184.
  • Šaparauskas, J. (2004). Darnaus miesto vystymo(-si) daugiatikslė selektonovacija (Multiobjective selective innovation for sustainable urban development). Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius: Technika.
  • Srinivasan, V., & Shocker, A. (1973). Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences. Psychometrika, 38(3), 337-369.
  • Strezov, V., Evens, A., & Evans, T. J. (2017). Assessment of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of the indicators for sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 25(3), 242-253. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1649
  • Turskis, Z. (2008). Multi-attribute contractors ranking method by applying ordering of feasible alternatives of solutions in terms of preferability technique. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 14(2), 224-239.
  • Vansevičius, S., & Tyla, A. (n.d.). Lietuvos apskritys (Lithuanian regions). Retrieved from https://www.vle.lt/Straipsnis/Lietuvos-apskritys-125700
  • Volkov, A. (2018). Assessment of the impact of the common agricultural policy direct payments system on agricultural sustainability. Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius: Technika.
  • Zahedi, F. (1986). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Survey of the Method and Its Applications. Interfaces, 16(4), 96-108. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/25060854
  • Zavadskas, E. K., & Kaklauskas, A. (1996). Pastatų sistemotechninis vertinimas (Systematictechnical evaluation of buildings). Vilnius: Technika. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13921525.1998.10531385
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171609009

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.