The transportation sector has extensive environmental, social, and economic impacts on society. Given such impacts, it is necessary for this sector to rely on sustainable development. A growing number of investigations explore fuzzy decision systems for sustainable transport each year, addressing a multitude of topics in this area of research. The purpose of this study is to investigate the current status and trends of studies exploring “fuzzy decision systems for sustainable transport.” To accomplish this, the study relies on the scientometric analysis and uses the bibliographic information stored on Web of Science Core Collection. The study, more specifically, seeks to focus on three central purposes: to identify the specifications of publications investigating fuzzy decision systems for sustainable transport; to explain how research studies in this field have taken shape; and to specify hot topics and frontiers of research exploration in this area. The findings of this study offer new insights into research on fuzzy decision systems for sustainable transport, from various perspectives. Another contribution of this study is that it helps researchers to readily observe the status of various topics in this area and gain knowledge of the frontiers of research.
Van den BergR.De LangenP. W.Environmental Sustainability in Container Transport: The Attitudes of Shippers and Forwarders. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, Vol. 20, No. 2, 2017, pp. 146–162.
2.
US Energy Information Administration. Energy Consumption Estimates by Sector. US Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C.https://www.eia.gov/consumption/. Accessed September 1, 2019.
3.
ShanmugamS.SunC.ChenZ.WuY. R.Enhanced Bioconversion of Hemicellulosic Biomass by Microbial Consortium for Biobutanol Production With Bioaugmentation Strategy. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 279, 2019, pp. 149–155.
4.
ShanmugamS.NgoH. H.WuY. R.Advanced CRISPR/Cas-Based Genome Editing Tools for Microbial Biofuels Production: A Review. Renewable Energy, Vol. 149, 2020, pp. 1107–1119.
5.
US Environmental Protection Agency. Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions. Accessed August 28, 2019.
6.
LitmanT.BurwellD.Issues in Sustainable Transportation. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2006, pp. 331–347.
7.
ZhouJ.Sustainable Transportation in the US: A Review of Proposals, Policies, and Programs Since 2000. Frontiers of Architectural Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2012, pp. 150–165.
8.
VinodhS.DevadasanS. R.Twenty Criteria Based Agility Assessment Using Fuzzy Logic Approach. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 54, No. 9, 2011, pp. 1219–1231.
9.
Kutlu GündoğduF.KahramanC.A novel spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its renewable energy application. Soft Computing, Vol. 24, No. 6, 2020, pp. 4607–4621.
10.
VinodhS.MahmoodY. A..AhmadiA.VermaA. K.SrividyaA.KumarU.Fuzzy fault tree analysis: a review of concept and application. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2013, pp. 19–32.
11.
ChenC.ChenY.HorowitzM.HouH.LiuZ.PellegrinoD.Towards an Explanatory and Computational Theory of Scientific Discovery. Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2009, pp. 191–209.
12.
FreemanL. C.A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness. Sociometry, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1977, pp. 35–41.
13.
ChenC.Searching for Intellectual Turning Points: Progressive Knowledge Domain Visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 101, Supplement 1, 2004, pp. 5303–5310.
14.
KhoshsepehrZ.AlimohammadlouM.MohammadiA.Ranaei KordshouliH. A.Scientometrics of Emerging Trends in the Concepts of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and Quality4. 0. Sciences and Techniques of Information Management, 2022. 10.22091/stim.2022.7738.1707
15.
RazmjooeiD.AlimohammadlouM.Ranaei KordshouliH. A.AskarifarK.Investigating Industry 4.0 Concept and its Technologies in the Maritime Industry: Keyword Co-Occurrence Analysis. Road, Vol. 31, No. 114, 2022, pp. 235–244.
16.
MalakoutikhahM.AlimohammadlouM.RabieiH.FaghihiS. A.KamaliniaM.JahangiriM.A Scientometric Study of Unsafe Behavior Through Web of Science During 1991–2020. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, Vol. 28, No. 4, 2022, pp. 2033–2045.
17.
LuoX.ZhangX.ZhangL.HuangG.Visualization of Chinese CBM Research: A Scientometrics Review. Sustainability, Vol. 9, No. 6, 2017, p. 980.
18.
SongJ.LiY.FengZ.WangH.Cluster Analysis of the Intellectual Structure of PPP Research. Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2019, p. 04018053.
19.
YangL.HeL.MaY.WuL.ZhangZ.A Visualized Investigation on the Intellectual Structure and Evolution of Waste Printed Circuit Board Research During 2000–2016. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 26, No. 11, 2019, pp. 11336–11341.
20.
ChenC.DubinR.KimM. C.Emerging Trends and New Developments in Regenerative Medicine: A Scientometric Update (2000–2014). Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, Vol. 14, No. 9, 2014, pp. 1295–1317.
21.
LiuY.SunT.YangL.Evaluating the Performance and Intellectual Structure of Construction and Demolition Waste Research During 2000–2016. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 24, No. 23, 2017, pp. 19259–19266.
22.
BarrosA. C.UhlC.Logging Along the Amazon River and Estuary: Patterns, Problems and Potential. Forest Ecology and Management, Vol. 77, No. 1–3, 1995, pp. 87–105.
23.
GovindanK.PaamP.AbtahiA. R.A Fuzzy Multi-Objective Optimization Model for Sustainable Reverse Logistics Network Design. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 67, 2016, pp. 753–768.
24.
RajakR.ParthibanP.DhanalakshmiR.Sustainable transportation systems performance evaluation using fuzzy logic. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 1, No. 71, 2016, pp. 503–513.
AwasthiA.ChauhanS. S.OmraniH.Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 10, 2011, pp. 12270–12280.
27.
GovindanK.KhodaverdiR.JafarianA.A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner production, Vol. 1, No. 47, 2013, pp. 345–354.
28.
BüyüközkanG.ÇifciG.A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2012, pp. 3000–3011.
29.
AwasthiA.ChauhanS. S.Using AHP and Dempster-Shafer theory for evaluating sustainable transport solutions. Environmental Modelling & Software, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2011, pp. 787–796.
30.
KannanD.RashidiK.NoorizadehA.CullinaneK.Applying the triple bottom line in sustainable supplier selection: A meta-review of the state-of-the-art. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 269, 2020, pp. 1–53.
31.
AwasthiA.ChauhanS. S.GoyalS. K.A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 126, No. 2, 2010, pp. 370–378.
32.
DekkerR.BloemhofJ.MallidisI.Operations Research for green logistics–An overview of aspects, issues, contributions and challenges. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 219, No. 3, 2012, pp. 671–679.
33.
AghdaieM. H.ZolfaniS. H.ZavadskasE. K.Prioritizing constructing projects of municipalities based on AHP and COPRAS-G: a case study about footbridges in Iran. The Baltic journal of road and bridge engineering, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2012, pp. 145–153.
34.
LittigB.GriesslerE.Social Sustainability: A Catchword Between Political Pragmatism and Social Theory. International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 8, No. 1–2, 2005, pp. 65–79.
35.
DempseyN.BramleyG.PowerS.BrownC.The Social Dimension of Sustainable Development: Defining Urban Social Sustainability. Sustainable Development, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 289–300.
36.
EkenerE.HanssonJ.GustavssonM.Addressing Positive Impacts in Social LCA—Discussing Current and New Approaches Exemplified by the Case of Vehicle Fuels. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2018, pp. 556–568.
37.
HaghshenasH.VaziriM.GholamialamA.Evaluation of Sustainable Policy in Urban Transportation Using System Dynamics and World Cities Data: A Case Study in Isfahan. Cities, Vol. 45, 2015, pp. 104–115.
38.
JeonC. M.AmekudziA. A.GuenslerR. L.Sustainability Assessment at the Transportation Planning Level: Performance Measures and Indexes. Transport Policy, Vol. 25, 2013, pp. 10–21.
39.
LucasK.Transport and Social Exclusion: Where are we Now?Transport Policy, Vol. 20, 2012, pp. 105–113.
40.
XiaB.OlanipekunA.ChenQ.XieL.LiuY.Conceptualising the State of the Art of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the Construction Industry and its Nexus to Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 195, 2018, pp. 340–353.
41.
NeilsonA.DanielB.TjandraS.Systematic Review of the Literature on Big Data in the Transportation Domain: Concepts and Applications. Big Data Research, Vol. 17, 2019, pp. 35–44.
42.
HsuC. Y.YangC. S.YuL. C.LinC. F.YaoH. H.ChenD. Y.LaiK. R.ChangP. C.Development of a Cloud-Based Service Framework for Energy Conservation in a Sustainable Intelligent Transportation System. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 164, 2015, pp. 454–461.
43.
AlaertsL.ChapmanD.EyckmansJ.Van AckerK.Circular Economy Indicators for Person Mobility and Transport. Report. CE Center - Circular Economy Policy Research Center, No. 10, 2020, pp. 1–49.
44.
WalkerB.SaltD.Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2012.
45.
XueX.WangL.YangR. J.Exploring the Science of Resilience: Critical Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Natural Hazards, Vol. 90, No. 1, 2018, pp. 477–510.
46.
McDanielsT.ChangS.ColeD.MikawozJ.LongstaffH.Fostering Resilience to Extreme Events Within Infrastructure Systems: Characterizing Decision Contexts for Mitigation and Adaptation. Global Environmental Change, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2008, pp. 310–318.
47.
KellyJ. C.ErsalT.LiC. T.MarshallB. M.KunduS.KeoleianG. A.PengH.HiskensI. A.SteinJ. L.Sustainability, Resiliency, and Grid Stability of the Coupled Electricity and Transportation Infrastructures: Case for an Integrated Analysis. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 21, No. 4, 2015, p. 04015001.
48.
Mejia-GiraldoD.Villarreal-MarimonJ.GuY.HeY.DuanZ.WangL.Sustainability and Resiliency Measures for Long-Term Investment Planning in Integrated Energy and Transportation Infrastructures. Journal of Energy Engineering, Vol. 138, No. 2, 2012, pp. 87–94.
49.
AchourH.BelloumiM.Decomposing the Influencing Factors of Energy Consumption in Tunisian Transportation Sector Using the LMDI Method. Transport Policy, 2016, Vol. 52, pp. 64–71.
50.
ZadehL. A.Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1965, 338–353.
51.
ZadehL. A.The Concept of a Linguistic Variable and its Application to Approximate Reasoning-III. Information Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1975, pp. 43–80.
52.
ChengS. H.ChenS. M.JianW. S.Fuzzy Time Series Forecasting Based on Fuzzy Logical Relationships and Similarity Measures. Information Sciences, Vol. 327, 2016, pp. 272–287.
53.
ChiaoK. P.The Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Methodology Using Type 2 Fuzzy Linguistic Judgments. Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 49, 2016, pp. 189–211.
54.
AtanassovK.Review and New Results on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets. Sofia, Preprint Im-MFAIS-1-88, 1988.
55.
SmarandacheF.A Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic Logic. In SmarandacheF. (ed.), Philosophy, American Research Press, Rehoboth, 1999, pp. 1–141.
56.
SmarandacheF.Definiton of Neutrosophic Logic - A Generalization of the Intuitionistic Fuzzy Logic. Proc., EUSFLAT Conference, Zittau, Germany, September 10–12, 2003, University of Applied Sciences, Zittau, Germany, pp. 141–146.
57.
YagerR. R.Generalized Orthopair Fuzzy Sets. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 25, No. 5, 2016, pp. 1222–1230.
58.
Kutlu GündoğduF.KahramanC.Spherical Fuzzy Sets and Spherical Fuzzy TOPSIS Method. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2019, pp. 337–352.
