Advertisement

Performance Evaluation of Green Supply Chain Management Using the Grey DEMATEL–ARAS Model

  • Kajal Chatterjee
  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
  • Jagannath Roy
  • Samarjit Kar
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 225)

Abstract

Under stakeholder pressure and more strict regulations, firms need to enhance green supply chain management (GSCM) practice using multidimensional approaches. In view of these facts, a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) technique can be implemented while evaluating GSCM performance of alternative suppliers based on a set of criteria to deal with vagueness of human perceptions. The grey set theory is used to interpret the linguistic preference in accordance with the subjective evaluation. The cause–effect relationships among GSCM criteria, as well as their weights are considered using the grey DEMATEL approach. The grey ARAS method is also applied, using the weights obtained, for evaluating and ranking the GSCM performance of alternative suppliers. A sensitivity analysis conducted to ensure the reliability of solutions is described and the comparison of the applied technique with other MCDM methods such as grey TOPSIS and grey COPRAS is provided.

Keywords

Green supply chain management (GSCM) DEMATEL Grey set ARAS Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) 

References

  1. 1.
    Antucheviciene, J., Zakarevicius, A., Zavadskas, E.: Measuring congruence of ranking results applying particular MCDM methods. INFORMATICA. 22(3), 319–338 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai, C., Sarkis, J.: A grey-based DEMATEL model for evaluating business process management critical success factors. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 146, 281–292 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bykzkan, G., Cifci, G.: A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(3), 3000–3011 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chan, H., Wang, X.: An integrated fuzzy approach for aggregative supplier risk assessment. In: Fuzzy Hierarchical Model for Risk Assessment, pp. 45–69. Springer, London (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalalah, D., Hayajneh, M., Batieha, F.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 8384–8391 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deleris, L., Erhun, F.: Quantitative risk assessment in supply chains: a case study based on engineering risk analysis concepts. In: Planning Production and Inventories in the Extended Enterprise, pp. 105–131. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Govindan, K., Chaudhuri, A.: Interrelationships of risks faced by third party logistics service providers: a DEMATEL based approach. Trans. Res. Part E 90, 177–195 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, A., Kang, H., Hsu, C., Hung, H.: A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 791727 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li, G., Yamaguchi, D., Nagai, M.: A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem. Math. Comput. Model. 46, 573–581 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liou, J., Tamosaitiene, J., Zavadskas, E., Tzeng, G.: New hybrid COPRAS-G MADM model for improving and selecting suppliers in green supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 54(1), 114–134 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, C., Chen, S., Tzeng, G.: Constructing a cognition map of alternative fuel vehicles using the DEMATEL method. J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal. 16, 5–19 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mangla, S., Kumar, P., Barua, M.: An integrated methodology of FTA and fuzzy AHP for risk assessment in green supply chain. Int. J. Oper. Res. (2015) (in press)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mathiyazhagan, K., Ali, D., Abbas, A., Xu, L.: Application of analytical hierarchy process to evaluate pressures to implement green supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 107, 229–236 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., NoorulHaq, A., Geng, Y.: An ISM approach for barrier analysis in implementing green supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 47, 283–297 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perron, G.M.: Barriers to Environmental Performance Improvements in Canadian SMEs. Dalhousie University, Canada (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Selviaridis, K., Spring, M., Profillidis, V., Botzoris, G.: Benefits, risks, selection criteria and success factors for third-party logistics services. Marit. Econ. Logist. 10(4), 380–392 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Srivastava, S.: Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature review. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 9(1), 53–80 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turskis, Z., Zavadskas, E.: A novel method for multiple criteria analysis: grey additive ratio as sessment (ARAS-G) method. Informatica 21, 597–610 (2010)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu, H., Chang, S.: A case study of using DEMATEL method to identify critical factors in green supply chain management. Appl. Math. Comput. 256, 394–403 (2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang, Z., Li, J.: Assessment of green supply chain risk based on circular economy. In: IEEE 17th International conference on industrial engineering and engineering management (IE&EM), pp. 1276–1280 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEEM.2010.5645996
  21. 21.
    Zavadskas, E., Kaklauskas, A., Turskis, Z., Tamoaitien, J.: Selection of the effective dwelling house walls by applying attributes values determined at intervals. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 14(2), 85–93 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, W., Zhang, X., Fu, X., Liu, Y.: A grey analytic network process (ANP) model to identify storm tide risk. GSIS 582–587 (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.: Institutional-based antecedents and performance outcomes of internal and external green supply chain management practices. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 19, 106–117 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zolfani, S., Antucheviciene, J.: Team member selecting based on AHP and TOPSIS grey. Inz. Ekon.—Eng. Econ. 23(4), 425–434 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kajal Chatterjee
    • 1
  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
    • 2
  • Jagannath Roy
    • 1
  • Samarjit Kar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsNational Institute of TechnologyDurgapurIndia
  2. 2.Department of Construction Technology and ManagementVilnius Gediminas Technical UniversityVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations