- -

A Process Oriented MCDM Approach to Construct a Circular Economy Composite Index

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

A Process Oriented MCDM Approach to Construct a Circular Economy Composite Index

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: Garcia-Bernabeu;H ...
Tamaño: 325.3Kb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Abrir
dc.contributor.author Garcia-Bernabeu, Ana es_ES
dc.contributor.author Hilario Caballero, Adolfo es_ES
dc.contributor.author Pla Santamaría, David es_ES
dc.contributor.author Salas-Molina, Francisco es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2020-06-04T06:30:49Z
dc.date.available 2020-06-04T06:30:49Z
dc.date.issued 2020-01-15 es_ES
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/145203
dc.description.abstract [EN] The purpose of this contribution is to develop a Circular Economy Composite indicator to benchmark EU countries performance. Europe is at the forefront of the global transition towards a sustainable and circular economy. To this end, the European Commission has launched in 2015 a Circular Economy Action Plan including a monitoring framework to measure progress and to assess the effectiveness of initiatives towards the circular economy in the European Union (EU) and Member States. Still, this monitoring framework lacks a composite indicator at the national level to aggregate the circular economy dimensions into a single summary indicator. Although there is a wide range of sustainability composite indicators, no aggregate circular economy index exits to this date. We use a multi-criteria approach to construct a circular economy composite index based on TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preferences by Similarity to Ideal Solutions) methodology. In addition, we introduce a novel aggregation methodology for building a composite indicator where different levels of compensability for the distances to the ideal and anti-ideal (or negative-ideal) values of each indicator are considered. In order to illustrate the advantages of this proposal, we have applied it to evaluate the Circular Economy performance of EU Member States for the year 2016. This proposal can be a valuable tool for identifying areas in which the countries need to concentrate their efforts to boost their circular economy performance. es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher MDPI AG es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Sustainability es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento (by) es_ES
dc.subject Circular economy es_ES
dc.subject Composite indicators es_ES
dc.subject Multi-criteria analysis es_ES
dc.subject Sustainability es_ES
dc.subject TOPSIS es_ES
dc.subject.classification ECONOMIA APLICADA es_ES
dc.subject.classification INGENIERIA DE SISTEMAS Y AUTOMATICA es_ES
dc.subject.classification ECONOMIA FINANCIERA Y CONTABILIDAD es_ES
dc.title A Process Oriented MCDM Approach to Construct a Circular Economy Composite Index es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.3390/su12020618 es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Economía y Ciencias Sociales - Departament d'Economia i Ciències Socials es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Ingeniería de Sistemas y Automática - Departament d'Enginyeria de Sistemes i Automàtica es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Garcia-Bernabeu, A.; Hilario Caballero, A.; Pla Santamaría, D.; Salas-Molina, F. (2020). A Process Oriented MCDM Approach to Construct a Circular Economy Composite Index. Sustainability. 12(2):1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020618 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020618 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 1 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 14 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 12 es_ES
dc.description.issue 2 es_ES
dc.identifier.eissn 2071-1050 es_ES
dc.relation.pasarela S\400794 es_ES
dc.description.references Genovese, A., Acquaye, A. A., Figueroa, A., & Koh, S. C. L. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: Evidence and some applications. Omega, 66, 344-357. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015 es_ES
dc.description.references Di Maio, F., & Rem, P. C. (2015). A Robust Indicator for Promoting Circular Economy through Recycling. Journal of Environmental Protection, 06(10), 1095-1104. doi:10.4236/jep.2015.610096 es_ES
dc.description.references Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., Ulgiati, S., & Zhang, P. (2013). Measuring China’s Circular Economy. Science, 339(6127), 1526-1527. doi:10.1126/science.1227059 es_ES
dc.description.references Geng, Y., Fu, J., Sarkis, J., & Xue, B. (2012). Towards a national circular economy indicator system in China: an evaluation and critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 23(1), 216-224. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.07.005 es_ES
dc.description.references Elia, V., Gnoni, M. G., & Tornese, F. (2017). Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: A critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2741-2751. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.196 es_ES
dc.description.references Huijbregts, M. A. J., Rombouts, L. J. A., Hellweg, S., Frischknecht, R., Hendriks, A. J., van de Meent, D., … Struijs, J. (2006). Is Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand a Useful Indicator for the Environmental Performance of Products? Environmental Science & Technology, 40(3), 641-648. doi:10.1021/es051689g es_ES
dc.description.references Brown, M. T., & Ulgiati, S. (2004). Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: H.T. Odum’s contributions to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecological Modelling, 178(1-2), 201-213. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.03.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Rees, W. E. (1992). Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 121-130. doi:10.1177/095624789200400212 es_ES
dc.description.references Wiedmann, T., & Barrett, J. (2010). A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods. Sustainability, 2(6), 1645-1693. doi:10.3390/su2061645 es_ES
dc.description.references Narodoslawsky, M., & Krotscheck, C. (1995). The sustainable process index (SPI): evaluating processes according to environmental compatibility. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 41(2-3), 383-397. doi:10.1016/0304-3894(94)00114-v es_ES
dc.description.references Munda, G. (2005). «Measuring Sustainability»: A Multi-Criterion Framework. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7(1), 117-134. doi:10.1007/s10668-003-4713-0 es_ES
dc.description.references Janeiro, L., & Patel, M. K. (2015). Choosing sustainable technologies. Implications of the underlying sustainability paradigm in the decision-making process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 105, 438-446. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.029 es_ES
dc.description.references Diaz-Balteiro, L., González-Pachón, J., & Romero, C. (2017). Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review. European Journal of Operational Research, 258(2), 607-616. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.08.075 es_ES
dc.description.references Wilson, M. C., & Wu, J. (2016). The problems of weak sustainability and associated indicators. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 24(1), 44-51. doi:10.1080/13504509.2015.1136360 es_ES
dc.description.references Arrow, K. J., Chenery, H. B., Minhas, B. S., & Solow, R. M. (1961). Capital-Labor Substitution and Economic Efficiency. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 43(3), 225. doi:10.2307/1927286 es_ES
dc.description.references Blackorby, C., Donaldson, D., & Weymark, J. A. (1982). A normative approach to industrial-performance evaluation and concentration indices. European Economic Review, 19(1), 89-121. doi:10.1016/0014-2921(82)90007-1 es_ES
dc.description.references Rennings, K., Ludwig Brockmann, K., & Bergmann, H. (1997). Voluntary agreements in environmental protection: experiences in Germany and future perspectives. Business Strategy and the Environment, 6(5), 245-263. doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0836(199711)6:5<245::aid-bse104>3.0.co;2-f es_ES
dc.description.references Mathews, J. A., & Tan, H. (2016). Circular economy: Lessons from China. Nature, 531(7595), 440-442. doi:10.1038/531440a es_ES
dc.description.references Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., Rogge, N., Van Puyenbroeck, T., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., … Tarantola, S. (2008). Creating composite indicators with DEA and robustness analysis: the case of the Technology Achievement Index. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(2), 239-251. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602445 es_ES
dc.description.references Giannetti, B. F., Bonilla, S. H., Silva, C. C., & Almeida, C. M. V. B. (2009). The reliability of experts’ opinions in constructing a composite environmental index: The case of ESI 2005. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(8), 2448-2459. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.018 es_ES
dc.description.references Makkonen, T., & van der Have, R. P. (2012). Benchmarking regional innovative performance: composite measures and direct innovation counts. Scientometrics, 94(1), 247-262. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0753-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Mazziotta, M., & Pareto, A. (2015). On a Generalized Non-compensatory Composite Index for Measuring Socio-economic Phenomena. Social Indicators Research, 127(3), 983-1003. doi:10.1007/s11205-015-0998-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Greco, M., Mazziotta, M., & Pareto, A. (2016). A Composite Index to Measure the Italian «Enological Vocation». Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8, 691-697. doi:10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.045 es_ES
dc.description.references Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2018). On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness. Social Indicators Research, 141(1), 61-94. doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Attardi, R., Cerreta, M., Sannicandro, V., & Torre, C. M. (2018). Non-compensatory composite indicators for the evaluation of urban planning policy: The Land-Use Policy Efficiency Index (LUPEI). European Journal of Operational Research, 264(2), 491-507. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.07.064 es_ES
dc.description.references Angilella, S., Catalfo, P., Corrente, S., Giarlotta, A., Greco, S., & Rizzo, M. (2018). Robust sustainable development assessment with composite indices aggregating interacting dimensions: The hierarchical-SMAA-Choquet integral approach. Knowledge-Based Systems, 158, 136-153. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2018.05.041 es_ES
dc.description.references Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). Sigma-Mu efficiency analysis: A methodology for evaluating units through composite indicators. European Journal of Operational Research, 278(3), 942-960. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2019.04.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Ruiz, F., El Gibari, S., Cabello, J. M., & Gómez, T. (2020). MRP-WSCI: Multiple reference point based weak and strong composite indicators. Omega, 95, 102060. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2019.04.003 es_ES
dc.description.references Sands, G. R., & Podmore, T. H. (2000). A generalized environmental sustainability index for agricultural systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 79(1), 29-41. doi:10.1016/s0167-8809(99)00147-4 es_ES
dc.description.references Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234-281. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5 es_ES
dc.description.references Singh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K., & Dikshit, A. K. (2007). Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecological Indicators, 7(3), 565-588. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.06.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Ülengin, B., Ülengin, F., & Güvenç, Ü. (2001). A multidimensional approach to urban quality of life: The case of Istanbul. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(2), 361-374. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(00)00047-3 es_ES
dc.description.references Buckland, S. T., Studeny, A. C., Magurran, A. E., Illian, J. B., & Newson, S. E. (2011). The geometric mean of relative abundance indices: a biodiversity measure with a difference. Ecosphere, 2(9), art100. doi:10.1890/es11-00186.1 es_ES
dc.description.references El Gibari, S., Gómez, T., & Ruiz, F. (2018). Building composite indicators using multicriteria methods: a review. Journal of Business Economics, 89(1), 1-24. doi:10.1007/s11573-018-0902-z es_ES
dc.description.references Gan, X., Fernandez, I. C., Guo, J., Wilson, M., Zhao, Y., Zhou, B., & Wu, J. (2017). When to use what: Methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators. Ecological Indicators, 81, 491-502. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.05.068 es_ES
dc.description.references Li, H., Bao, W., Xiu, C., Zhang, Y., & Xu, H. (2010). Energy conservation and circular economy in China’s process industries. Energy, 35(11), 4273-4281. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.04.021 es_ES
dc.subject.ods 07.- Asegurar el acceso a energías asequibles, fiables, sostenibles y modernas para todos es_ES
dc.subject.ods 06.- Garantizar la disponibilidad y la gestión sostenible del agua y el saneamiento para todos es_ES
dc.subject.ods 03.- Garantizar una vida saludable y promover el bienestar para todos y todas en todas las edades es_ES
dc.subject.ods 02.- Poner fin al hambre, conseguir la seguridad alimentaria y una mejor nutrición, y promover la agricultura sostenible es_ES
dc.subject.ods 17.- Fortalecer los medios de ejecución y reavivar la alianza mundial para el desarrollo sostenible es_ES
dc.subject.ods 16.- Promover sociedades pacíficas e inclusivas para el desarrollo sostenible, facilitar acceso a la justicia para todos y crear instituciones eficaces, responsables e inclusivas a todos los niveles es_ES
dc.subject.ods 13.- Tomar medidas urgentes para combatir el cambio climático y sus efectos es_ES
dc.subject.ods 12.- Garantizar las pautas de consumo y de producción sostenibles es_ES
dc.subject.ods 11.- Conseguir que las ciudades y los asentamientos humanos sean inclusivos, seguros, resilientes y sostenibles es_ES
dc.subject.ods 10.- Reducir las desigualdades entre países y dentro de ellos es_ES
dc.subject.ods 09.- Desarrollar infraestructuras resilientes, promover la industrialización inclusiva y sostenible, y fomentar la innovación es_ES
dc.subject.ods 08.- Fomentar el crecimiento económico sostenido, inclusivo y sostenible, el empleo pleno y productivo, y el trabajo decente para todos es_ES


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

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem