- -

Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation

Mostrar el registro completo del ítem

Ligardo-Herrera, I.; Gómez-Navarro, T.; Gonzalez-Urango, H. (2018). Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation. Central European Journal of Operations Research. 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4

Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10251/120137

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: Application of the ...
Tamaño: 919.8Kb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión del Autor.
Abrir/Preview
[Cerrado]
Nombre: Li-He_Go-Na_Go-Ur ...
Tamaño: 1006.Kb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Solicitar una copia al autor

Metadatos del ítem

Título: Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation
Autor: Ligardo-Herrera, Iván Gómez-Navarro, Tomás Gonzalez-Urango, Hannia
Entidad UPV: Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Proyectos de Ingeniería - Departament de Projectes d'Enginyeria
Fecha difusión:
Fecha de fin de embargo: 2019-08-01
Resumen:
[EN] This paper presents a methodology to assess the stakeholders¿ influence in a research project within the context of responsible research and innovation. The methodology is based on a combination of the multicriteria ...[+]
Palabras clave: Stakeholders management , Analytic network process (ANP) , Responsible research and innovation (RRI)
Derechos de uso: Reserva de todos los derechos
Fuente:
Central European Journal of Operations Research. (issn: 1435-246X )
DOI: 10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4
Editorial:
Springer-Verlag
Versión del editor: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4
Código del Proyecto:
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MINECO//CSO2016-76828-R/ES/PROPUESTA DE INDICADORES PARA IMPULSAR EL DISEÑO DE UNA POLITICA ORIENTADA AL DESARROLLO DE INVESTIGACION E INNOVACION RESPONSABLE EN ESPAÑA/
Agradecimientos:
The authors would like to thank to our anonymous referees for their constructive comments and suggestions that helped us to improve the quality of the paper. Also, to the “Bolívar Gana con Ciencia” program from the Gobernación ...[+]
Tipo: Artículo

References

Akbari N, Irawan CA, Jones DF, Menachof D (2017) A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry. Renew Energy 102:118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.10.035

Aragonés-Beltrán P, García-Melón M, Montesinos-Valera J (2017) How to assess stakeholders’ influence in project management? A proposal based on the analytic network process. Int J Proj Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.001

Barrios Ortiz MA, De Felice F, Negrete KP et al (2016) An AHP-topsis integrated model for selecting the most appropriate tomography equipment. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 15:861–885. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021962201640006X [+]
Akbari N, Irawan CA, Jones DF, Menachof D (2017) A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry. Renew Energy 102:118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.10.035

Aragonés-Beltrán P, García-Melón M, Montesinos-Valera J (2017) How to assess stakeholders’ influence in project management? A proposal based on the analytic network process. Int J Proj Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.001

Barrios Ortiz MA, De Felice F, Negrete KP et al (2016) An AHP-topsis integrated model for selecting the most appropriate tomography equipment. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 15:861–885. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021962201640006X

Bhupendra KV, Sangle S (2017) What drives successful implementation of product stewardship strategy? The role of absorptive capability. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 24:186–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1394

Botero C, Pereira C, Tosic M, Manjarrez G (2015) Design of an index for monitoring the environmental quality of tourist beaches from a holistic approach. Ocean Coast Manag 108:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.07.017

Brugha R (2000) Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy Plan 15:239–246. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.239

Burget M, Bardone E, Pedaste M (2017) Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: a literature review. Sci Eng Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9782-1

Caballero-Luque A, Aragonés-Beltrán P, García-Melón M, Dema-Pérez C (2010) Analysis of the alignment of Company goals to Web content using ANP. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 9:419–436. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622010003889

Claudia K, Köppl A, Stagl S (2014) Towards an operational measurement of socio-ecological performance. Working Paper no 52

Colin E, Ackermann F (1998) Making strategy: the journey of strategic management. SAGE Publications Ltd, London

Dahlsrud A (2006) How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 13:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr

de Jong IM, Kupper F, Broerse J (2016) Inclusive deliberation and action in emerging RRI practices: the case of neuroimaging in security management. J Responsib Innov 3:26–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2015.1137752

De Lopez T (2001) Stakeholder management for conservation projects: a case study of Ream National Park, Cambodia. J Environ Manag 28:47–60

De Lotto R, Gazzola V, Gossenberg S et al (2016) Proposal to reduce natural risks: analytic network process to evaluate efficiency of city planning strategies. Springer, Cham, pp 650–664

European Commission (2011) DG Research workshop on Responsible Research & Innovation in Europe

Geoghegan-Quinn M (2012) Responsible research and innovation. Europe’s ability to respond to societal challenges

Görener A (2012) Comparing AHP and ANP: an application of strategic decisions making in a Manufacturing Company. Int J Bus Soc Sci 3:194–208

Jaafari A, Najafi A, García-Melón M (2015) Decision-making for the selection of a best wood extraction method: an analytic network process approach. For Policy Econ 50:200–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.09.010

Koops BJ (2015) The concepts, approaches, and applications of responsible innovations: an introduction. In: Koops BJ, Oosterlaken I, Romijn H, Swierstra T, van den Hoven J (eds) Responsible innovation 2: concepts, approaches, and applications. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–15

Ligardo-Herrera I, Gómez-Navarro T, Inigo EA, Blok V (2018) Addressing climate change in responsible research and innovation: recommendations for its operationalization. Sustainability 10:20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062012

Lubberink R, Blok V, van Ophem J, Omta O (2017) Lessons for responsible innovation in the business context: a systematic literature review of responsible, social and sustainable innovation practices. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050721

Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really. Acad Manag Rev 22:853–886. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1997.9711022105

Owen R, Bessant J, Heintz M (2013) Responsible innovation: managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society. Wiley, New York

Peris J, García-Melón M, Gómez-Navarro T, Calabuig C (2013) Prioritizing local agenda 21 programmes using analytic network process: a Spanish case study. Sustain Dev 21:338–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.514

Ramzan N, Degenkolbe S, Witt W (2008) Evaluating and improving environmental performance of HC’s recovery system: a case study of distillation unit. Chem Eng J 140:201–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2007.09.042

Rosso M, Bottero M, Pomarico S et al (2014) Integrating multicriteria evaluation and stakeholders analysis for assessing hydropower projects. Energy Policy 67:870–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.007

Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48:9–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I

Saaty TL (1994) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces (Providence) 24:19–43

Saaty TL (2001) The analytic network process: decision making with dependence and feedback. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

Saaty TL (2005) Theory and applications of the analytic network process: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its generalization to dependence and feedback, the Analytic Network Process (ANP), are methods of relative measurement of tangibles and intangibles. Being able to derive such measurements is essential for making go

Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1:83. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

Saaty TL, Peniwati K (2008) Group decision making : drawing out and reconciling differences. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

Sangle S, Babu PR (2007) Evaluating sustainability practices in terms of stakeholders’ satisfaction. Int J Bus Gov Ethics 3:56. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBGE.2007.011934

Shiau TA, Chuen-Yu JK (2016) Developing an indicator system for measuring the social sustainability of offshore wind power farms. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8050470

Šijanec M, Žarnić R, Šelih J (2009) Multicriterial sustainability assessment of residential buildings. Technol Econ Dev Econ 15:612–630. https://doi.org/10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.612-630

Sipahi S, Timor M (2010) The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications. Manag Decis 48:775–808. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011043920

Sólnes J (2003) Environmental quality indexing of large industrial development alternatives using AHP. Environ Impact Assess Rev 23:283–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(03)00004-0

Stahl BC, Coeckelbergh M (2016) Ethics of healthcare robotics: towards responsible research and innovation. Rob Auton Syst 86:152–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2016.08.018

Stilgoe J, Owen R, Macnaghten P (2013) Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Res Policy 42:1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008

Strand R, Spaapen J, Bauer MW et al (2015) Indicators for promoting and monitoring responsible research and innovation report from the expert group on policy indicators

Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169:1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028

van de Poel I, Asveld L, Flipse S et al (2017) Company strategies for responsible research and innovation (RRI): a conceptual model. Sustainability 9:2045. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112045

Von Schomberg R (2011) Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. Tech abschätzen lehren Bild transdisziplinärer Methoden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93468-6_2

Wu X, Cui P (2016) A study of the time-space evolution characteristics of urban-rural integration development in a mountainous area based on ESDA-GIS: the case of the Qinling-Daba mountains in China. Sustainability 8:1085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111085

Yüksel I, Dagdeviren M (2007) Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis—a case study for a textile firm. Inf Sci (NY) 177:3364–3382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.001

[-]

recommendations

 

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro completo del ítem