Mixed strategy to allocate resources with air pollution treatment in China: based on the analytic network process and large-group decision-making method

  • Xi Chen
  • Liu Zhao
  • Mujgan Sagir Özdemir
  • Haiming Liang
Research Article
  • 39 Downloads

Abstract

The resource allocation of air pollution treatment in China is a complex problem, since many alternatives are available and many criteria influence mutually. A number of stakeholders participate in this issue holding different opinions because of the benefits they value. So a method is needed, based on the analytic network process (ANP) and large-group decision-making (LGDM), to rank the alternatives considering interdependent criteria and stakeholders’ opinions. In this method, the criteria related to air pollution treatment are examined by experts. Then, the network structure of the problem is constructed based on the relationships between the criteria. Further, every participant in each group provide comparison matrices by judging the importance between criteria according to dominance, regarding a certain criteria (or goal), and the geometric average comparison matrix of each group is obtained. The decision weight of each group is derived by combining the subjective weight and the objective weight, in which the subjective weight is provided by organizers, while the objective weight is determined by considering the consensus levels of groups. The final comparison matrices are obtained by the geometric average of comparison matrices and the decision weights. Next, the resource allocation is made according to the priorities of the alternatives using the super decision software. Finally, an example is given to illustrate the use of the proposed method.

Keywords

Air pollution Resource allocation Analytic network process Large-group decision-making Decision weight Alternative selection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was partly supported by the National Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 71473188 and 71601133), the Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (grant number 2017JM7001), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (grant numbers JB170606 and XJS17004). The authors are very grateful to Professor Thomas L. Saaty for his constructive guide, suggestions, and modifications that led to form and improve this paper in Pittsburgh. This paper is also with great remembrance to my dear research supervisor Professor Thomas L. Saaty.

References

  1. Arsić S, Nikolić D, Živković Ž (2017) Hybrid SWOT-ANP-FANP model for prioritization strategies of sustainable development of ecotourism in National Park Djerdap, Serbia. Forest Policy Econ 80:11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arıkan E, Şimşit-Kalender ZT, Vayvay Ö (2017) Solid waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria decision making methods and an application in Turkey. J Clean Prod 142(1):403–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. China State Council (2013) Air pollution prevention and control action plan. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  4. Chang KL, Liao SK, Tseng TW, Liao CY (2015) An ANP based TOPSIS approach for Taiwanese service apartment location selection. Asia Pac Manage Rev 20(2):49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dong C, Huang GH, Cai YP, Liu Y (2012) An inexact optimization modeling approach for supporting energy systems planning and air pollution mitigation in Beijing City. Energy 37(1):673–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gu Y, Yim SH (2016) The air quality and health impacts of domestic trans-boundary pollution in various regions of China. Environ Int 97:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hussain M, Awasthi A, Tiwari MK (2016) Interpretive structural modeling-analytic network process integrated framework for evaluating sustainable supply chain management alternatives. Appl Math Model 40(5–6):3671–3687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Köne AÇ, Büke T (2007) An analytical network process (ANP) evaluation of alternative fuels for electricity generation in Turkey. Energ Policy 35(10):5220–5228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Liu Y, Bi JW, Fan ZP (2017) Ranking products through online reviews: a method based on sentiment analysis technique and intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. Inf Fus 36:149–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang X (2016a) A method for large group decision-making based on evaluation information provided by participators from multiple groups. Inform Fusion 29:132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu X, Wu Y, Hu Y, Liu D, Zhang J, Chen C, Yuan Z, Lu Y (2016b) Government employees’ perception of urban air pollution and willingness to pay for improved quality: a cross-sectional survey study in Nanchang, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(21):22183–22189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Moridi P, Atabi F, Nouri J, Yarahmadi R (2017) Selection of optimized air pollutant filtration technologies for petrochemical industries through multiple-attribute decision-making. J Environ Manag 197:456–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Molinos-Senante M, Gómez T, Caballero R, Hernández-Sancho F, Sala-Garrido R (2015) Assessment of wastewater treatment alternatives for small communities: an analytic network process approach. Sci Total Environ 532:676–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Muga HE, Mihelcic JR (2008) Sustainability of wastewater treatment technologies. J Environ Manag 88(3):437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. O'Malley V (1999) The integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) directive and its implications for the environment and industrial activities in Europe 1. Sensor Actuat B-Chem 59(2–3):78–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Partovi FY (2006) An analytic model for locating facilities strategically. Omega 34(1):41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Saaty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Saaty TL (1996) Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  20. Shao M, Tang X, Zhang Y, Li W (2006) City clusters in China: air and surface water pollution. Front Ecol Environ 4(7):353–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sueyoshi T, Yuan Y (2015) China's regional sustainability and diversified resource allocation: DEA environmental assessment on economic development and air pollution. Energ Econ 49:239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang S, Yan Q, Shi W, Wang X, Sun X, Yu P, Wu J, Xiao Y (2018) Measuring the impact of air pollution on respiratory infection risk in China. Environ Pollut 232:477–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vučijak B, Kurtagić SM, Silajdžić I (2016) Multicriteria decision making in selecting best solid waste management scenario: a municipal case study from Bosnia and Herzegovina. J Clean Prod 130:166–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wu X, Chen S, Guo J, Gao G (2018) Effect of air pollution on the stock yield of heavy pollution enterprises in China’s key control cities. J Clean Prod 170:399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wei Y, Gu J, Wang H, Yao T, Wu Z (2018) Uncovering the culprits of air pollution: evidence from China’s economic sectors and regional heterogeneities. J Clean Prod 171:1481–1493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang S, Hao J (2012) Air quality management in China: issues, challenges, and options. J Environ Sci 24(1):2–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wu CS, Lin CT, Lee C (2010) Optimal marketing strategy: a decision-making with ANP and TOPSIS. Int J Prod Econ 127(1):190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang S, Xing J, Zhao B, Jang C, Hao J (2014) Effectiveness of national air pollution control policies on the air quality in metropolitan areas of China. J Environ Sci 26(1):13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wen Z, Yu Y, Yan J (2016) Best available techniques assessment for coal gasification to promote cleaner production based on the ELECTRE-II method. J Clean Prod 129:12–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zafeirakopoulos IB, Genevois ME (2015) An analytic network process approach for the environmental aspect selection problem—a case study for a hand blender. Environ Impact Assess Rev 54:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang Q, Qiu M, Lai K, Zhong N (2015) Cough and environmental air pollution in China. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 35:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zeng XT, Tong YF, Cui L, Kong XM, Sheng XM (2017) Population-production-pollution nexus based air pollution management model for alleviating the atmospheric crisis in Beijing, China. J Environ Manag 197:507–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhao X, Yu X, Wang Y, Fan C (2016) Economic evaluation of health losses from air pollution in Beijing, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(12):11716–11728CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xi Chen
    • 1
  • Liu Zhao
    • 1
  • Mujgan Sagir Özdemir
    • 2
  • Haiming Liang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management Engineering, School of Economics and ManagementXidian UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.Industrial Engineering Department, Engineering FacultyEskişehir Osmangazi UniversitesiEskişehirTurkey

Personalised recommendations