Abstract
The location selection is a strategic decision that significantly influences revenue, level of competition, and success of companies and countries. This study aims to propose a hybrid approach for the location selection, to evaluate the potential location for the automotive manufacturing plant of Turkey, and to reveal a comprehensive analysis of weighting and multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. The proposed approach integrates different objective and subjective weighting, MCDM, and Copeland methods. Turkey has recently introduced its first automobile prototypes and has announced that the manufacturing plant will be located in Bursa. This decision is thoroughly examined via four objective weighting methods—entropy, criteria importance through inter-criteria correlation, standard deviation, and mean weight and a subjective method—analytic hierarchy process. Besides, the alternatives are evaluated based on six MCDM methods—technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution, preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations, vise kriterijumska optimizacija i kompromisno resenje, organization, rangement et synthese de donnes relationnelles, elimination and choice translating reality, and the weighted sum method. The outcomes of the weighting methods and MCDM methods, the impact of the attribute weights provided by each method on rankings, the outcome of each method pair, and selection of the best location (Bursa) are thoroughly evaluated considering a real-world case with a potential outcome that makes evaluations more realistic and tangible unlike most of the other studies in the literature. In this regard, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients are considered. Also, sensitivity analysis is conducted to reveal the robustness of the methods and the impact of each weight on outcomes. Some considerable results, including the most robust method and optimal method pairs for the case, are presented.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Yang J, Lee H (1997) An AHP decision model for facility location selection. Facilities 15(9/10):241–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632779710178785
Guitouni A, Martel J-M (1998) Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. Eur J Oper Res 109(2):501–521
Abdel-Basset M, Gamal A, Chakrabortty RK, Ryan M (2021) A new hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach for location selection of sustainable offshore wind energy stations: a case study. J Clean Prod 280:124462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124462
Kannan D, Moazzeni S, Sm D, Afrasiabi A (2021) A hybrid approach based on MCDM methods and Monte Carlo simulation for sustainable evaluation of potential solar sites in east of Iran. J Clean Prod 279:122368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122368
Wang R, Li X, Xu C, Li F (2020) Study on location decision framework of electric vehicle battery swapping station: using a hybrid MCDM method. Sustain Urban Areas 61:102149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102149
Hwang C-L, Yoon K (1981) Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Multiple attribute decision making. Springer, pp 58–191
Brans JP, Vincke P (1985) Note—A preference ranking organisation method. Manage Sci 31(6):647–656. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647
Brans JP, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: the promethee method. Eur J Oper Res 24(2):228–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5
Coello Coello CA (1999) A comprehensive survey of evolutionary-based multiobjective optimization techniques. Knowl Inf Syst 1(3):269–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03325101
Bourguignon B, Massart DL (1994) The Oreste method for multicriteria decision making in experimental chemistry. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 22(2):241–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-7439(93)E0083-G
Roy B (1978) ELECTRE III: un algorithme de classements fondé sur une représentation floue des préférences en présence de critères multiples. Cahiers du CERO 20(1):3–24
Opricovic S, Tzeng G-H (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156(2):445–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
Tavakkoli Moghaddam R, Mousavi SM, Heydar M (2011) An integrated AHP-VIKOR methodology for plant location selection. Int J Eng 24(2):127–137
Rezaian S, Jozi SA (2016) Application of multi criteria decision-making technique in site selection of wind farm—a case study of Northwestern Iran. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 44(5):803–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-015-0517-6
Vasileiou M, Loukogeorgaki E, Vagiona DG (2017) GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis for site selection of hybrid offshore wind and wave energy systems in Greece. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 73:745–757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.161
Chauhan A, Singh A (2016) A hybrid multi-criteria decision making method approach for selecting a sustainable location of healthcare waste disposal facility. J Clean Prod 139:1001–1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.098
Kuo M-S (2011) Optimal location selection for an international distribution center by using a new hybrid method. Expert Syst Appl 38(6):7208–7221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.002
Sánchez-Lozano JM, García-Cascales MS, Lamata MT (2016) Comparative TOPSIS-ELECTRE TRI methods for optimal sites for photovoltaic solar farms. Case study in Spain. J Clean Prod 127:387–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.005
Dey B, Bairagi B, Sarkar B, Sanyal SK (2017) Group heterogeneity in multi member decision making model with an application to warehouse location selection in a supply chain. Comput Ind Eng 105:101–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.12.025
Ishizaka A, Nemery P, Lidouh K (2013) Location selection for the construction of a casino in the Greater London region: a triple multi-criteria approach. Tour Manage 34:211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.05.003
Kharat MG, Kamble SJ, Raut RD, Kamble SS, Dhume SM (2016) Modeling landfill site selection using an integrated fuzzy MCDM approach. Model Earth Syst Environ 2(2):53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-016-0106-x
Wu Y, Zhang T, Xu C, Zhang B, Li L, Ke Y, Yan Y, Xu R (2019) Optimal location selection for offshore wind-PV-seawater pumped storage power plant using a hybrid MCDM approach: a two-stage framework. Energy Convers Manage 199:112066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112066
Villacreses G, Gaona G, Martínez-Gómez J, Jijón DJ (2017) Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: the case of continental Ecuador. Renew Energy 109:275–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.03.041
Wu Y, Zhang B, Xu C, Li L (2018) Site selection decision framework using fuzzy ANP-VIKOR for large commercial rooftop PV system based on sustainability perspective. Sustain Urban Areas 40:454–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.04.024
Liu K-M, Lin S-H, Hsieh J-C, Tzeng G-H (2018) Improving the food waste composting facilities site selection for sustainable development using a hybrid modified MADM model. Waste Manage 75:44–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.02.017
Lee H-C, Chang C-T (2018) Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 92:883–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.007
Seker S, Aydin N (2020) Hydrogen production facility location selection for Black Sea using entropy based TOPSIS under IVPF environment. Int J Hydrogen Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.183
Kumar RR, Mishra S, Kumar C (2017) Prioritizing the solution of cloud service selection using integrated MCDM methods under Fuzzy environment. J Supercomput 73(11):4652–4682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-2039-1
Hanine M, Boutkhoum O, Tikniouine A, Agouti T (2017) An application of OLAP/GIS-Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS methodology for decision making: Location selection for landfill of industrial wastes as a case study. KSCE J Civ Eng 21(6):2074–2084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-0114-4
Dey B, Bairagi B, Sarkar B, Sanyal SK (2016) Warehouse location selection by fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodologies based on subjective and objective criteria. Int J Manag Sci Eng Manag 11(4):262–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2015.1086964
Dortaj A, Maghsoudy S, Doulati Ardejani F, Eskandari Z (2020) A hybrid multi-criteria decision making method for site selection of subsurface dams in semi-arid region of Iran. Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100284
Sennaroglu B, Varlik Celebi G (2018) A military airport location selection by AHP integrated PROMETHEE and VIKOR methods. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 59:160–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.12.022
Mousavi SM, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Heydar M, Ebrahimnejad S (2013) Multi-criteria decision making for plant location selection: an integrated delphi-AHP-PROMETHEE methodology. Arab J Sci Eng 38(5):1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-012-0361-8
Wu X, Zhang C, Jiang L, Liao H (2020) An integrated method with PROMETHEE and conflict analysis for qualitative and quantitative decision-making: case study of site selection for wind power plants. Cogn Comput 12(1):100–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-019-09675-7
Safaei Ghadikolaei A, Khalili Esbouei S, Antucheviciene J (2014) Applying fuzzy MCDM for financial performance evaluation of Iranian companies. Technol Econ Dev Econ 20(2):274–291. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.913274
Zhou F, Wang X, Samvedi A (2018) Quality improvement pilot program selection based on dynamic hybrid MCDM approach. Ind Manag Data Syst 118:144–163
Jeya Girubha R, Vinodh S (2012) Application of fuzzy VIKOR and environmental impact analysis for material selection of an automotive component. Mater Des 37:478–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.01.022
Jain V, Sangaiah AK, Sakhuja S, Thoduka N, Aggarwal R (2018) Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS: a case study in the Indian automotive industry. Neural Comput Appl 29(7):555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2533-z
Galankashi MR, Helmi SA, Hashemzahi P (2016) Supplier selection in automobile industry: a mixed balanced scorecard–fuzzy AHP approach. Alex Eng J 55(1):93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.01.005
Gupta S, Soni U, Kumar G (2019) Green supplier selection using multi-criterion decision making under fuzzy environment: a case study in automotive industry. Comput Ind Eng 136:663–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.07.038
Moradian M, Modanloo V, Aghaiee S (2019) Comparative analysis of multi criteria decision making techniques for material selection of brake booster valve body. J Traffic Transp Eng (Engl Edn) 6(5):526–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2018.02.001
Hadian H, Chahardoli S, Golmohammadi A-M, Mostafaeipour A (2019) A practical framework for supplier selection decisions with an application to the automotive sector. Int J Prod Res 58:2997–3014. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1624854
Dweiri F, Kumar S, Khan SA, Jain V (2016) Designing an integrated AHP based decision support system for supplier selection in automotive industry. Expert Syst Appl 62:273–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.06.030
Kabir G, Sumi RS (2015) Hazardous waste transportation firm selection using fuzzy analytic hierarchy and PROMETHEE methods. Int J Shipp Transp Logist 7(2):115–136. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTL.2015.067847
Xu T, Moon DH, Baek SG (2011) A simulation study integrated with analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in an automotive manufacturing system. Simulation 88(4):450–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549711407781
Sadeghzadeh K, Salehi MB (2011) Mathematical analysis of fuel cell strategic technologies development solutions in the automotive industry by the TOPSIS multi-criteria decision making method. Int J Hydrog Energy 36(20):13272–13280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.07.064
Wu X, Liao H (2018) An approach to quality function deployment based on probabilistic linguistic term sets and ORESTE method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making. Inf Fusion 43:13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2017.11.008
Nestic S, Lampón JF, Aleksic A, Cabanelas P, Tadic D (2019) Ranking manufacturing processes from the quality management perspective in the automotive industry. Expert Syst 36(6):e12451. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12451
Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
Saaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Math Model 9(3):161–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
Wang J-J, Yang D-L (2007) Using a hybrid multi-criteria decision aid method for information systems outsourcing. Comput Oper Res 34(12):3691–3700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2006.01.017
Mohsen O, Fereshteh N (2017) An extended VIKOR method based on entropy measure for the failure modes risk assessment—a case study of the geothermal power plant (GPP). Saf Sci 92:160–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.006
Triantaphyllou E, Mann SH (1989) An examination of the effectiveness of multi-dimensional decision-making methods: a decision-making paradox. Decis Support Syst 5(3):303–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(89)90037-7
Opricovic S (1998) Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Fac Civ Eng Belgrade 2(1):5–21
Chitsaz N, Banihabib ME (2015) Comparison of different multi criteria decision-making models in prioritizing flood management alternatives. Water Resour Manage 29(8):2503–2525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-0954-6
Govindan K, Jepsen MB (2016) ELECTRE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 250(1):1–29
Roubens M (1982) Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making. Eur J Oper Res 10(1):51–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(82)90131-X
Alinezhad A, Khalili J (2019) ELECTRE I-II–III Methods. In: Alinezhad A, Khalili J (eds) New Methods and Applications in Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15009-9_23
Roy BJT, Decision, (1991) The outranking approach and the foundations of electre methods. Theor Decis 31(1):49–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00134132
Alinezhad A, Khalili J (2019) ORESTE method. In: Alinezhad A, Khalili J (eds) New methods and applications in multiple attribute decision making (MADM). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15009-9_3
Alinezhad A, Khalili J (2019) PROMETHEE I-II-III Methods. In: Alinezhad A, Khalili J (eds) New Methods and Applications in Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15009-9_5
Abedi M, Ali Torabi S, Norouzi G-H, Hamzeh M, Elyasi G-R (2012) PROMETHEE II: a knowledge-driven method for copper exploration. Comput Geosci 46:255–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.12.012
Zyoud SH, Fuchs-Hanusch D (2017) A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Syst Appl 78:158–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016
Zhang H, Gu C-l, Gu L-w, Zhang Y (2011) The evaluation of tourism destination competitiveness by TOPSIS & information entropy: a case in the Yangtze river delta of China. Tour Manage 32(2):443–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.02.007
Alinezhad A, Khalili J (2019) VIKOR method. In: Alinezhad A, Khalili J (eds) New methods and applications in multiple attribute decision making (MADM). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15009-9_4
Opricovic S, Tzeng G-H (2007) Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. Eur J Oper Res 178(2):514–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020
Mulliner E, Malys N, Maliene V (2016) Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega 59:146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.013
Si J, Marjanovic-Halburd L, Nasiri F, Bell S (2016) Assessment of building-integrated green technologies: a review and case study on applications of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method. Sustain Urban Areas 27:106–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.013
MacCarthy BL, Atthirawong W (2003) Factors affecting location decisions in international operations—a Delphi study. Int J Oper Prod Manag 23(7):794–818. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310481568
Coughlin CC, Terza JV, Arromdee V (1991) State characteristics and the location of foreign direct investment within the United States. Rev Econ Stat 73:675–683
McMillan TE (1965) Why manufacturers choose plant locations vs Determinants of Plant Locations. Land Econ 41(3):239–246. https://doi.org/10.2307/3144856
Schmenner RW (1982) Making business location decisions. Prentice Hall
Mehren GL (1957) Plant location in theory and in practice: the economics of space, Melvin L. Greenhut. Chapel Hill: The University of North Caro. Am J Agric Econ 39(1):193–194. https://doi.org/10.2307/1233907
Spooner D (1974) Some qualitative aspects of industrial movement in a problem region in the United Kingdom. Town Plan Rev 45(1):63
Wheeler D, Mody A (1992) International investment location decisions: the case of US firms. J Int Econ 33(1–2):57–76
PROTEMA (2016) Feasibility study automotive production in Konya.
Şahin M (2020) A comprehensive analysis of weighting and multicriteria methods in the context of sustainable energy. Int J Environ Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02922-7
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Şahin, M. Location selection by multi-criteria decision-making methods based on objective and subjective weightings. Knowl Inf Syst 63, 1991–2021 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-021-01588-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-021-01588-y