Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying key factors influencing sustainable element in healthcare waste management using the interval-valued fuzzy DEMATEL method

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the rapid growth of healthcare waste and improvement of people’s environment awareness, the sustainability of healthcare waste management is becoming increasingly important. However, there is no research on the identification of key factors that influence sustainable healthcare waste management using the quantitative methods in the existing literature. Based on an in-depth analysis of the existing literature, we found out 15 factors influencing sustainable healthcare waste management. Then we used the interval-valued fuzzy DEMATEL (Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory) method to analyze these factors. Finally, we presented a case study to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. We found that sound legal framework supporting sustainability, strengthening sustainable management training or education programs and positive attitude and perception towards sustainable healthcare waste management are the top three most important factors. This study contributes to the literature on sustainable healthcare waste management and helps to improve the sustainability of healthcare waste management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moscelli G, Siciliani L, Gutacker N, Cookson R (2018) Socioeconomic inequality of access to healthcare: does choice explain the gradient. J Health Econ 57:290–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2017.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aung TS, Luan SJ, Xu QY (2019) Application of multi-criteria-decision approach for the analysis of medical waste management systems in Myanmar. J Clean Prod 222:733–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Caniato M, Tudor T, Vaccari M (2015) International governance structures for health-care waste management: a systematic review of scientific literature. J Environ Manag 153:93–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Li H, Li JL, Zhang ZB et al (2020) Establishing an interval-valued fuzzy decision-making method for sustainable selection of healthcare waste treatment technologies in the emerging economies. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 22:501–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00943-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Azmal M, Kalhor R, Dehcheshmeh NF (2014) Going toward green hospital by sustainable healthcare waste management: Segregation, treatment and safe disposal. Health 6:2632–2640. https://doi.org/10.4236/health.2014.619302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hong JM, Zhan S, Yu ZH et al (2018) Life-cycle environmental and economic assessment of medical waste treatment. J Clean Prod 174:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Apergis N, Bhattacharya M, Hadhri W (2020) Health care expenditure and environmental pollution: a cross-country comparison across different income groups. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:8142–8156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07457-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bui TD, Tsai FM, Tseng ML, Ali MH (2020) Identifying sustainable solid waste management barriers in practice using the fuzzy Delphi method. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Salman RA, Beller E, Kagan J et al (2014) Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management. Lancet 383(9912):176–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62297-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Martens ML, Carvalho MM (2017) Key factors of sustainability in project management context: a survey exploring the project managers’ perspective. Int J Proj Manag 35(6):1084–1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cavicchi C, Vagnoni E (2017) Does intellectual capital promote the shift of healthcare organizations towards sustainable development? Evidence from Italy. J Clean Prod 153:275–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li H, Li JL, Zhu JR (2019) Intervention mechanism of healthcare service goods based on social welfare maximization in China. PLoS ONE 14(3):e0214655. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Maria FD, Sisani F, Contini S et al (2020) Is the policy of the European Union in waste management sustainable? An assessment of the Italian context. Waste Manage 103:437–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Xu Y, Yeh CH, Yang SP (2020) Risk-based performance evaluation of improvement strategies for sustainable e-waste management. Resour Conserv Recycl 155:104664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Romano G, Senante MM (2020) Factors affecting eco-efficiency of municipal waste services in Tuscan municipalities: an empirical investigation of different management models. Waste Manage 105:384–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.02.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bartolacci F, Paolini A, Quaranta AG et al (2018) Assessing factors that influence waste management financial sustainability. Waste Manage 79:571–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.07.050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cesaro A, Belgiorno V (2017) Sustainability of medical waste management in different sized health care facilities. Waste Biomass Valor 8:1819–1827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9730-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Oña J, Oña R, Calvo FJ (2012) A classification tree approach to identify key factors of transit service quality. Expert Syst Appl 39:11164–11171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.03.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pietzsch N, Ribeiro JLD, Medeiros JF (2017) Benefits, challenges and critical factors of success for zero waste: a systematic literature review. Waste Manage 67:324–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hsu CH, Chang AY, Luo W (2017) Identifying key performance factors for sustainability development of SMEs e integrating QFD and fuzzy MADM methods. J Clean Prod 161:629–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Vardopoulos I (2019) Critical sustainable development factors in the adaptive reuse of urban industrial buildings. A fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Sustain Cities Soc 50:101684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Singh PK, Sarkar P (2020) A framework based on fuzzy Delphi and DEMATEL for sustainable product development: a case of Indian automotive industry. J Clean Prod 246:118991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mahmoudi S, Jalali A, Ahmadi M et al (2019) Identifying critical success factors in Heart Failure Self-Care using fuzzy DEMATEL method. Appl Soft Comput 84:105729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kuo MS (2011) A novel interval-valued fuzzy MCDM method for improving airlines’ service quality in Chinese cross-strait airlines. Transport Res E-LOG 47(6):1177–1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2011.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ashtiani B, Haghighirad F, Makui A et al (2009) Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput 9(2):457–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2008.05.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang ZF, Ren JZ, Goodsite ME et al (2018) Waste-to-energy, municipal solid waste treatment, and best available technology: comprehensive evaluation by an interval-valued fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method. J Clean Prod 172:887–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Chen SM, Li TS (2013) Evaluating students’ answerscripts based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Inform Sciences 235:308–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2012.12.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gorzałczany MB (1987) A method of inference in approximate reasoning based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 21(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(87)90148-5

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Türkşen İB, Bilgiç T (1996) Interval valued strict preference with Zadeh triples. Fuzzy Sets Syst 78(2):183–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(95)00167-0

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Cornelis C, Kerre EE (2006) Advances and challenges in interval-valued fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(5):622–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2005.10.007

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang GJ, Li XP (1998) The applications of interval-valued fuzzy numbers and interval-distribution numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 98(3):331–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00368-5

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Gabus A, Fontela F (1972) World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Geneva, Switzerland, Geneva Research Center

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kumar A, Dixit G, Prabhakar D (2016) Analyzing the factors affecting the sustainable municipal solid waste management (MSWM). Indian J Sci Technol 9(47):1–7. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i47/105286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ezeah C, Roberts CL (2012) Analysis of barriers and success factors affecting the adoption of sustainable management of municipal solid waste in Nigeria. J Environ Manage 103:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chen Y, Li PJ, Carlo L et al (2009) Sustainable management measures for healthcare waste in China. Waste Manage 29(6):1996–2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.11.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ko S, Kim W et al (2020) The economic value of sustainable recycling and waste management policies: the case of a waste management crisis in South Korea. Waste Manage 104:220–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lee S, Vaccari M, Tudor T (2016) Considerations for choosing appropriate healthcare waste management treatment technologies: a case study from an East Midlands NHS Trust, in England. J Clean Prod 135:139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Phillips J, Mondal MK (2014) Determining the sustainability of options for municipal solid waste disposal in Varanasi. India. Sustain Cities Soc 10:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2013.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71432002, 71972012) and Chinese Government Scholarship of China Scholarship Committee (Grant No. 201906030126).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, China

    Hao Li & Jinlin Li

  2. Department of Business Administration, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 14, 8032 , Zurich, Switzerland

    Helmut Dietl

Authors
  1. Hao Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helmut Dietl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jinlin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jinlin Li.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables

Table A1 The normalized relation matrix
Full size table

A1 and

Table A2 The total relation matrix
Full size table

A2.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, H., Dietl, H. & Li, J. Identifying key factors influencing sustainable element in healthcare waste management using the interval-valued fuzzy DEMATEL method. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 23, 1777–1790 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-021-01233-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-021-01233-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation