Optimal selection and challenges of municipal waste management system using an integrated approach: a case study

References

• Abdulhasan, M. J., M. M. Hanafiah, M. S. Satchet, H. S. Abdulaali, M. E. Toriman, and A. A. Al-Raad. 2019. Combining GIS, Fuzzy logic, and AHP models for solid waste disposal site selection in Nasiriyah, Iraq. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 17 (3):6701–22. doi:10.15666/aeer/1703_67016722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achillas, C., C. Vlachokostas, N. Moussiopoulos, G. Banias, G. Kafetzopoulos, and A. Karagiannidis. 2011. Social acceptance for the development of a waste-to-energy plant in an urban area. Resources, Conservation & Recycling 55(9–10):857–63. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.04.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aghajani Mir, M., P. Taherei Ghazvinei, N. M. N. Sulaiman, N. E. A. Basri, S. Saheri, N. Z. Mahmood, A. Jahan, R. A. Begum, and N. Aghamohammadi. 2016. Application of TOPSIS and VIKOR improved versions in a multi criteria decision analysis to develop an optimized municipal solid waste management model. Journal of Environmental Management 166:109–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alao, M. A. 2020. Multi-criteria decision based waste to energy technology selection using entropy-weighted TOPSIS technique: The case study of Lagos, Nigeria. Energy 201:117675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali, Y., H. Pervez, and J. Khan. 2020. Selection of the most feasible wastewater treatment technology in Pakistan using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM. Water Conservation Science and Engineering 5 (3–4):199–213.
   Google Scholar
• “Annual Report on Solid Waste Management (2020-21). 2022. CPCB, Delhi”, Delhi. Accessed January 29, 2023. https://cpcb.nic.in/uploads/MSW/MSW_AnnualReport_2020-21.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Arıkan, E., Z. T. Şimşit-Kalender, and Ö. Vayvay. 2017. Solid waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria decision making methods and an application in Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production 142:403–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai, R., and B. Lin. 2022. Are residents willing to pay for garbage recycling: Evidence from a survey in Chinese first-tier cities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95:106789. doi: 10.1016/J.EIAR.2022.106789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balwada, J., S. Samaiya, and R. P. Mishra. 2021. Packaging plastic waste management for a circular economy and identifying a better waste collection system using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Procedia CIRP 98:270–75.
   Google Scholar
• Baras, N., D. Ziouzios, M. Dasygenis, and C. Tsanaktsidis. 2020 A cloud based smart recycling bin for waste classification. 2020 9th International Conference on Modern Circuits and Systems Technologies, MOCAST 2020, September. doi:10.1109/MOCAST49295.2020.9200283.
   Google Scholar
• Benardos, A. and D. Kaliampakos, Underground Solutions for Urban Waste Management: Status and Perspectives. ISWA, 2013. Accessed January 27, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318503365_Underground_Solutions_for_Urban_Waste_Management_Status_and_Perspectives.
   Google Scholar
• Bhanu, A. K., and R. Kumar. 2014. Strategy for municipal solid waste management: A case study of Patna. International Journal Chemical Environmental Biological Science 2 (4):223–27.
   Google Scholar
• Chamchali, M. M., and A. Ghazifard. 2021. A comparison of fuzzy logic and TOPSIS methods for landfill site selection according to field visits, engineering geology approach and geotechnical experiments (case study: Rudbar County, Iran). Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy 39(2):325–50. doi: 10.1177/0734242X20952839.
   Google Scholar
• da Xue, S. and W. da Xue. An introduction to Vacuum pipeline network collection and resource recovery of feces and sewage of livestock and poultry. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Chengdu, China, 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Demographic Profile of Patna Municipal Corporation (Census 2011) | The Website of India census. Accessed February. 19, 2023. https://indiacensus.net/district/patna.
   Google Scholar
• Du, L., Y. Feng, W. Lu, L. Kong, and Z. Yang. 2020. Evolutionary game analysis of stakeholders’ decision-making behaviours in construction and demolition waste management. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 84:106408. doi: 10.1016/J.EIAR.2020.106408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feyzi, S., M. Khanmohammadi, N. Abedinzadeh, and M. Aalipour. 2019. Multi- criteria decision analysis FANP based on GIS for siting municipal solid waste incineration power plant in the north of Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society 47:101513. doi: 10.1016/J.SCS.2019.101513.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghose, D., D. Jha, A. Sakshi, and S. Kumari. 2021. Solid waste management in patna municipal corporation: Present status and measures for improvement. Geography Explore- Journal of Research 73–80. https://www.patnawomenscollege.in/journal.
   Google Scholar
• Ghose, D., S. Pradhan, Shabbiruddin, and S. Shabbiruddin. 2022. Development of model for assessment of renewable energy sources: A case study on Gujarat, India. International Journal of Ambient Energy 43 (1):1157–66. doi:10.1080/01430750.2019.1691650.
   Google Scholar
• Goulart Coelho, L. M., L. C. Lange, and H. M. G. Coelho. 2017. Multi-criteria decision making to support waste management: A critical review of current practices and methods. Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy 35 (1):3–28. SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:10.1177/0734242X16664024.
   Google Scholar
• Gutierrez, J. M., M. Jensen, M. Henius, and T. Riaz. 2015. Smart waste collection system based on location intelligence. Procedia Computer Science 61:120–27. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2015.09.170.
   Google Scholar
• Hanine, M. An application of OLAP/GIS-Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS methodology for decision making: Location selection for landfill of industrial wastes as a case study. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 1–11. doi:10.1007/s12205-016-0114-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, W., G. Yan, and L. da Xu. 2014. Developing vehicular data cloud services in the IoT environment. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 10 (2):1587–95. doi:10.1109/TII.2014.2299233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, Q., K. Rodriguez, N. Whetstone, and S. Habel. 2019. Rapid internet of things (IoT) prototype for accurate people counting towards energy efficient buildings. http://www.itcon.org/2019/1.
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, C.-L., and K. Yoon. 1981. Multiple attribute decision making. In Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, Vol. 186, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
   Google Scholar
• Isalou, A. A., V. Zamani, B. Shahmoradi, and H. Alizadeh. 2013, Mar. Landfill site selection using integrated fuzzy logic and analytic network process (F-ANP). Environmental Earth Sciences 68(6):1745–55. doi: 10.1007/s12665-012-1865-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jambi, K. M., I. H. Khan, and M. A. Siddiqui. 2022 May. Evaluation of different plagiarism detection methods: A fuzzy MCDM perspective. Applied Sciences. 12 (9). 10.3390/app12094580
   Google Scholar
• Kabak, M., and M. Daǧdeviren. 2014. Prioritization of renewable energy sources for Turkey by using a hybrid MCDM methodology. Energy Conversion and Management 79:25–33. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2013.11.036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreissl, F. J. 2008. Water Environment Federation. Alternative Sewer Systems Task Force. Alternative Sewer Systems FD-12. McGraw-Hill Education. Accessed January 27, 2023. https://www.accessengineeringlibrary.com/content/book/9780071591225.
   Google Scholar
• Krishankumar, R., A. Raj Mishra, P. Rani, E. K. Zavadskas, K. S. Ravichandran, and S. Kar. 2022. A new decision model with integrated approach for healthcare waste treatment technology selection with generalized orthopair fuzzy information. Information Sciences 610:1010–28. doi:10.1016/J.INS.2022.08.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H. C., and C. Ter Chang. 2018. Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 92: 883–96. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, T.-S., and M.-J.-J. Wang. 1992. Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 50 (3):247–55. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(92)90223-Q.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lotfi, S., K. Habibi, and M. J. Koohsari. 2007. Integrating GIS and fuzzy logic for urban solid waste management (A case study of Sanandaj City, Iran). Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 10 (22):4000–07. doi:10.3923/pjbs.2007.4000.4007.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Milutinović, B., G. Stefanović, S. Milutinović, Ž. Čojbašić, and G. Vojković. 2015. Evaluation the social acceptance of waste treatment technique using fuzzy set theory. Accessed January 27, 2023. http://uest.ntua.gr/tinos2015/proceedings/pdfs/milutinovic_et_al.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Mohsen, R. A., and B. Abbassi. 2020. Prediction of greenhouse gas emissions from Ontario’s solid waste landfills using fuzzy logic based model. Waste Management 102 (February):743–50. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2019.11.035.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Narayanamoorthy, S., T. Manirathinam, S. Geetha, S. Salahshour, A. Ahmadian, and D. Kang. 2022. An approach to assess PWR methods to cope with physical barriers on plastic waste disposal and exploration from developing nations. Expert Systems with Applications 207:117996. doi:10.1016/J.ESWA.2022.117996.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassereddine, M., and H. Eskandari. 2017, December. An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 106:427–39. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nouri, D., M. R. Sabour, and M. GhanbarzadehLak. 2018, January. Industrial solid waste management through the application of multi-criteria decision-making analysis: A case study of shamsabad industrial complexes. Journal of Material Cycles & Waste Management 20(1):43–58. doi:10.1007/s10163-016-0544-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omar, M. F., J. A. Shukor, M. M. Kassim, and K. Che Hussin. 2021 September. Decision model using hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS: Towards improving decision making in food waste management. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 17 (3):[1639]–1650. doi:10.52462/jlls.119.
   Google Scholar
• Pandey, M. K. Solid Waste Management in Patna. A report of National Solid Waste Association of India (NSWAI). Accessed January 28, 2023. https://nswai.org/docs/final%20swm%20in%20patna.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Papia, R. and R. Aditya. An analysis of waste production in Patna”, ISA eSymposium for sociology. Indian Institute of Technology Patna (Bihar). Accessed January 28, 2023. https://www.iitp.ac.in/images/faculty_profile/human/Aditya/No.2.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Peng, X., and Y. Yang. 2016. Fundamental Properties of Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy Aggregation Operators. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 31 (5):444–87. doi:10.1002/int.21790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabbani, M., S. Amirhossein Sadati, and H. Farrokhi-Asl. 2020. Incorporating location routing model and decision making techniques in industrial waste management: Application in the automotive industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering 148:106692. doi:10.1016/J.CIE.2020.106692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodrigues, M. V. C., D. V. Guimarães, R. B. Galvão, E. Patrick, and F. Fernandes. 2022. Urban watershed management prioritization using the rapid impact assessment matrix (RIAM-UWMAP), GIS and field survey. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 94:106759. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2022.106759.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saghafi, S. 2019. Evaluation of aerobic/anaerobic industrial wastewater treatment processes: The application of multi‐criteria decision analysis. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 38 (5):13166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salimian, S., and S. M. Mousavi. 2022. The selection of healthcare waste treatment technologies by a multi-criteria group decision-making method with intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering 14(1):205–20. http://www.jise.ir/article_139146.html
   Google Scholar
• Samanta, S., and D. K. Jana. 2019, Feb. A multi-item transportation problem with mode of transportation preference by MCDM method in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Neural Computing & Applications 31(2):605–17. doi:10.1007/s00521-017-3093-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahnazari, A., M. Rafiee, A. Rohani, B. Bhushan Nagar, M. A. Ebrahiminik, and M. H. Aghkhani. 2020. Identification of effective factors to select energy recovery technologies from municipal solid waste using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM): A review of thermochemical technologies. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 40. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2020.100737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahsavar, M. M., Z. Kian, and M. Gheibi. 2022. Bio-recovery of municipal plastic waste management based on an integrated decision-making framework prediction and design pattern of outlet water turbidity and the amount of consumed energy and coagulant dosage in coagulation and flocculation process using the ANFIS system (case study in Kardeh water treatment plant, Mashhad, Iran) view project. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 108:215–234. doi:10.1016/j.jiec.2022.01.002.
   Google Scholar
• Shi, H., H. C. Liu, P. Li, and X. G. Xu. 2017. An integrated decision making approach for assessing healthcare waste treatment technologies from a multiple stakeholder. Waste Management 59:508–17. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2016.11.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, A., and P. Raj. 2019. Sustainable recycling model for municipal solid waste in Patna. Energy & Environment 30 (2):212–34. doi:10.1177/0958305X18787335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soltani, A., K. Hewage, B. Reza, and R. Sadiq. 2015. Multiple stakeholders in multi-criteria decision-making in the context of municipal solid waste management: A review. Waste Management 35: 318–28. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.09.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sufian, A. T., B. M. Abdullah, M. Ateeq, R. Wah, and D. Clements. 2019. A roadmap towards the smart factory. 12th International Conference on Developments in Esystems Engineering (DeSE) IEEE, Kazan, Russia, 978–83.
   Google Scholar
• Sukholthaman, P., and K. Shirahada. 2015. Technological challenges for effective development towards sustainable waste management in developing countries: Case study of Bangkok, Thailand. Technology in Society 43:231–39. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.003.
   Google Scholar
• Swarup, S., U. Verma, and R. Kumar. 2020. Implementation of new technologies in solid waste management of Patna: An appraisal of Patna municipal corporation. Pollution Response 39 (4):1122–30.
   Google Scholar
• Topaloglu, M., F. Yarkin, and T. Kaya. 2018. Solid waste collection system selection for smart cities based on a type-2 fuzzy multi-criteria decision technique. Soft Computing 22(15):4879–90. doi:10.1007/s00500-018-3232-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torkayesh, A. E., and S. E. Torkayesh. 2021. Evaluation of information and communication technology development in G7 countries: An integrated MCDM approach. Technology in Society 66:101670. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Kaa, G., J. Rezaei, L. Kamp, and A. de Winter. 2014. Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 32:662–70. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma, N., M. Kaur, and A. K. Tripathi. 2019. Greenhouse gas emissions from municipal solid waste management practice. In Environmental concerns and sustainable development: Volume 2: Biodiversity, soil and waste management, 399–408. Springer Singapore. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-6358-0_17.
   Google Scholar
• Waste Management | The Official Website of Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. Accessed January 27, 2023. https://moef.gov.in/en/service/environment/waste-management/.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, D. C., C. A. Velis, and L. Rodic. 2013. Integrated sustainable waste management in developing countries. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Waste and Resource Management 166 (2): 52–68. ICE Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, M. and G. Thung. 2016. Classification of trash for recyclability status. Accessed January 27, 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Classification-of-Trash-for-Recyclability-Status-Thung-Yang/c90811082924011c73fea6252f42b01af9076f28.
   Google Scholar
• Yazdani, M., S. Hashemkhani Zolfani, and E. K. Zavadskas. 2016. New integration of MCDM methods and QFD in the selection of green suppliers. Journal of Business Economics and Management 17 (6):1097–113. doi:10.3846/16111699.2016.1165282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, C., Y. Shao, K. Wang, and L. Zhang. 2019. A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications 121:1–17. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadeh, L. A. 1965 June. Fuzzy sets. Information & Control 8 (3):338–53. doi:10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, C., Q. Hu, S. Zeng, and W. Su. 2021. IOWLAD-based MCDM model for the site assessment of a household waste processing plant under a Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 89:106579. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2021.106579.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z., Y. Li, X. Wang, L. Zhu, H. Li, Y. Liu, N. Tang, Y. Xu, and Q. Hu. 2022. Investigating river health and potential risks using a novel hybrid decision-making framework with multi-source data fusion in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 96:106849. doi: 10.1016/J.EIAR.2022.106849.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar