Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2021-04-12
Township recycling performance assessment based on fuzzy TOPSIS model: An empirical investigation using the artificial intelligence-based VIKOR approach
The problem of waste reduction is particularly emphasized the sources of environmental income i.e. tax and unit-pricing, instead of stimulus recycling administrative in the published literatures. A long-term rebate policy for recycling fund allowance was implemented in different metropolitan districts. However, evaluating the recycling performance at the local level does not include examining its rationality and efficiency in detail. To understand the uncertainty of role in decision making for substitute ranking, analysis based on decision making using fuzzy interval for performance assessment. This article redefines the criteria for evaluating recycling performance at the township level with assistance of artificial intelligence, and illustrates the results. We used a simple and swift evaluation process, namely, the VIKOR method, in place of the traditional public hearing or the Delphi method. The conclusion derived from the results can be used to analyze the effectiveness of the rebate policy for recycling at the township level.
BrzeszczakA., Czuma-ImiołczykL. and CzestochowaL., Municipal Company as an Entity Performing Commune’s Own Tasks in terms of Waste Management in Czestochowa City, World Scientific News72 (2017), 77–85.
2.
ŞchiopuA.M., ApostolI., HodoreanuM. and GavrilescuM., Solid Waste in Romania: Management, Treatment and Pollution Prevention Practices, Environmental Engineering & Management Journal (EEMJ)6 (2007), 188–192.
3.
ChangC.L., A Modified VIKOR Method for Multiple Criteria Analysis, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment168 (2010), 339–344.
4.
AlizadehE., LejjyK.R. and AmiriE., Improving Routing in Vehicular Ad-hoc Network with VIKOR Algorithm, 2018 9th International Symposium on Telecommunications (IST) (2018), 337–341.
5.
Graham-RoweE., JessopD.C. and SparksP., Predicting Household Food Waste Reduction Using an Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour, Resources, Conservation and Recycling101 (2015), 194–202.
6.
LacosteE. and ChalminP., From Waste to Resource: 2006 World Waste Survey, Ciclope/Veolia, París, Francia, 2006.
7.
KipperbergG.A., Comparison of Household Recycling Behaviors in Norway and the United States, Environmental & Resource Economics36 (2007), 215–235.
8.
TzengG.H., TsaurS.H., LaiwY.D. and OpricovicS., Multicriteria Analysis of Environmental Quality in Taipei: Public Preferences and Improvement Strategies, Journal of Environmental Management65 (2002), 109–120.
9.
von KroghG., Artificial Intelligence in Organizations: New Opportunities for Phenomenon-Based Theorizing, Academy of Management Discoveries4/4 (2018), 404–409.
10.
BognerJ., PipattiR., HashimotoS., DiazC., MareckovaK. and DiazL., Mitigation of Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Waste: Conclusions and Strategies from the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) fourth assessment report, Waste Management and Research26 (2008), 11–32.
11.
KumarS., Kumar-SolankiV., ChoudharyS.K., SelamatA. and Gonzalez-CrespoR., Comparative Study on Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) and K-Means Clustering Approaches for Jobs Scheduling and Energy Optimization Model in Internet of Things (IoT), International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence6(Special Issue on Soft Computing) (2020), 107–116.
12.
TongL.I., ChenC.C. and WangC.H., Optimization of Multi-response Processes Using the VIKOR Method, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology31 (2007), 1049–1057.
13.
Abdel-BassetM., ZhouY., MohamedM. and ChangV., A Group Decision Making Framework Based on Neutrosophic VIKOR Approach for e-Government Website Evaluation, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems34 (2018), 4213–4224.
14.
PodolskyM.J. and SpiegelM., Municipal Waste Disposal: Unit Pricing and Recycling Opportunities, Public Works Management & Policy3 (1998), 27–39.
15.
JohnstoneN. and LabonneJ., Generation of Household Solid Waste in OECD Countries: An Empirical Analysis Using Macroeconomic Data, Land Economics80 (2004), 529–538.
16.
KackerR.N., Off-line Quality Control, Parameter Design and the Taguchi Method, Journal of Quality Technology17 (1985), 176–188.
17.
HongS. and AdamsR.M., Household Responses to Price Incentives for Recycling: Some Further Evidence, Land Economics (1999), 505–514.
18.
CallanS.J. and ThomasJ.M., Analyzing Demand for Disposal and Recycling Services: A Systems Approach, Eastern Economic Journal32 (2006), 221–240.
19.
OpricovicS. and TzengG.H., Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison with Outranking Methods, European Journal of Operational Research178 (2007), 514–529.
20.
OpricovicS. and TzengG.H., Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and VIKOR, European Journal of Operational Research156 (2004), 445–455.
21.
OpricovicS., Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems, PhD Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, Serbia, (1998).
22.
ChandakS.P., Trends in Solid Waste Management: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities, In International Consultative Meeting on Expanding Waste Management Services in Developing Countries, (2010), 18–19.
23.
HussainS.A.I., MondalS.P. and MandalU.K., VIKOR Method for Decision Making Problems in Interval Valued Neutrosophic Environment, Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Using Neutrosophic Sets, Springer, Cham, (2019), 587–602.
24.
SidiqueS.F., LupiF. and JoshiS.V., The Effects of Behavior and Attitudes on Drop-off Recycling Activities, Resources, Conservation and Recycling54 (2010), 163–170.
25.
SaleemN. and KhattakM.I., Deep Neural Networks for Speech Enhancement in Complex-Noisy Environments, International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence6(Special Issue on Soft Computing) (2020), 84–90.
26.
KinnamanT.C. and FullertonD., Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy, Journal of Urban Economics48 (2000), 419–442.
27.
KinnamanT.C. and FullertonD., Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy, Journal of Urban Economics48 (2000), 419–442.
28.
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Management Services in Developing Countries, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, International Environmental Technology Centre.
29.
ConitzerV., Sinnott-ArmstrongW., BorgJ.S., DengY. and KramerM., Moral Decision-making Frameworks for Artificial Intelligence. In Thirty-first AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-17) (2017), 4831–4835.
30.
ShresthaY.R., Ben-MenahemS.M. and von KroghG., Organizational Decision-Making Structures in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, California Management Review61 (2019), 66–83.
