Abstract
This work aims to enhance the efficiency and dependability of the green supplier selection process by developing a decision support tool. Thereby, a novel fuzzy group multi-criteria decision-making approach based on the Preference Selection Index (PSI) and Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) methods under the Fermatean Fuzzy (FF) environment for green supplier selection is proposed. The primary novelties and contributions are: (i) for the first time, the FF-PSI model is developed to extract the priority weight values of criteria, (ii) an improved FF-CoCoSo methodology is proposed, and (ii) the FF-PSI-CoCoSo framework is offered for resolving challenging real-life problems. To present the framework’s practicality, a real-case study evaluating six suppliers concerning nine drives under economics, environmental, and technological aspects in a textile company in Turkey is conducted. The results indicate that “green warehousing” is the most essential driver for green suppliers, followed by “recycling” and “damaged product ratio.” A detailed sensitivity and comparison check is further conducted to display the solidity and effectiveness of the proposed framework. The suggested framework offers a reliable solution for green supplier selection and a precise sustainable rating of suppliers. Moreover, it can be addressed to solve various challenging real-world problems.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this paper.
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.
List of abbreviations
AHP | = | Analytic Hierarchy Process |
BWM | = | Best Worst Method |
C | = | Cost |
CoCoSo | = | Combined Compromise Solution |
CODAS | = | Combinative Distance-based Assessment |
COPRAS | = | Complex Proportional Assessment |
DEA | = | Data Envelopment Analysis |
DEMATEL | = | Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory |
DPR | = | Damaged Product Ratio |
EI | = | Environmental Image |
FF | = | Fermatean Fuzzy |
FFS | = | Fermatean Fuzzy Sets |
GW | = | Green Warehousing |
IFS | = | Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets |
JIT | = | Just-In-Time |
LDR | = | Late Delivery Ratio |
MCDM | = | Multi Criteria Decision Making |
MCGDM | = | Fuzzy group multi-criteria decision-making |
MOORA | = | Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis |
QFD | = | Quality Function Deployment |
OH&S | = | Occupational Health and Safety |
PC | = | Pollution Control |
PFS | = | Pythagorean Fuzzy Sets |
PIPRECIA | = | Pivot Pairwise Relative Criteria Relevance Assessment |
PROMETHEE | = | Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation |
PSI | = | Preference Selection Index |
R | = | Recycle |
R&D | = | Research and Development |
SAW | = | Simple Additive Weighting |
SCE | = | Scenario |
SL | = | Supplier |
TA | = | Technical Assistance |
TC | = | Technological Competence |
TOPSIS | = | Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution |
VIKOR | = | Multi-Criteria Optimization and Compromise Solution |
WASPAS | = | Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment |
Notations
α | = | The membership degree |
β | = | Non-membership degree |
π | = | Indeterminacy degree |
= | Discourse universe | |
and | = | Fermatean Fuzzy Sets |
= | Positive real number | |
= | The distance functions | |
= | The score functions of | |
= | The accuracy functions of | |
= | The complement of | |
= | The defuzzified value of | |
= | Aggregated Fermatean Fuzzy | |
= | Total numbers of decision makers. | |
= | The Fermatean fuzzy decision matrix | |
= | The Fermatean fuzzy value of ith alternative on jth criterion. | |
= | The normalized Fermatean fuzzy value | |
= | The average normalized value | |
= | Preference value | |
= | Criteria weights | |
= | The Fermatean sum of the weighted comparability | |
= | The Fermatean power weight of comparability | |
= | The crisp sum of the weighted comparability | |
= | The crisp power weight of comparability | |
, , | = | Aggregated appraisal scores |
= | Final score |