[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 6, Issue 4 (Autumn 2019) ::
Environ. health eng. manag. 2019, 6(4): 257-268 Back to browse issues page
Comparison of decision-making approaches to prioritization of clean air action plans for sustainable development
Ahmet Çalık
Corresponding author:Department of International Trade and Logistics, KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey , ahmetcalik51@gmail.com
Abstract:   (993 Views)
Background: Clean air action plans have been prepared and are still being implemented in Turkey to control and prevent air pollution, and improve the air quality. The plans reveal a picture of the current situation and available inventory information. However, in order to implement the identified plans in real life, they need to be prioritized. This study aimed to identify and prioritize clean air action plans for Turkey using a framework of both fuzzy and crisp evaluations.
Methods: In this study, priorities of the plans were identified and analyzed with a decision-making model. A three-step research methodology was provided. First, literature was reviewed regarding sustainable development and action plans. Second, in order to narrow and specify action plans, the nominal group technique (NGT) was implemented. Finally, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and best-worst method (BWM) surveys were applied to environmental engineers and experts working on sustainable development to prioritize the action plans.
Results: It was revealed that heating dimension is considered as the most important criterion with the weight of 0.7469 in fuzzy AHP and 0.758 in BWM. AP1 with a weight of 0.3356 in fuzzy AHP and AP3 with a weight of 0.3289 in BWM were the most important sub-criteria, which are the plans for reducing coal use ranked at the forefront in reducing air pollution.
Conclusion: According to the results, there is no significant difference in the priority ranking results. The results of fuzzy AHP and BWM are very similar. For example, traffic criterion has the best performance in both methods in the evaluation of decision makers. In addition, the main and sub-criteria with the lowest priority are the same in these two methods.
Keywords: Air pollution, Cities, Decision making, Surveys and questionnaires
eprint link: http://eprints.kmu.ac.ir/id/eprint/32270
Full-Text [PDF 689 kb]   (360 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/12/30 | Accepted: 2019/12/30 | Published: 2019/12/30
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Çalık A. Comparison of decision-making approaches to prioritization of clean air action plans for sustainable development. Environ. health eng. manag.. 2019; 6 (4) :257-268
URL: http://ehemj.com/article-1-559-en.html


Volume 6, Issue 4 (Autumn 2019) Back to browse issues page
مجله مدیریت و مهندسی بهداشت محیط Environmental Health Engineering And Management Journal
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 32 queries by YEKTAWEB 4162