Hybrid multiple criteria decision-making methods: a review of applications for sustainability issues

References

• Aghdaie, M. H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2013). A hybrid approach for market segment evaluation and selection: An integration of data mining and MADM. Transformations in Business & Economics, 12, 431–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguezzoul, A. (2014). Third-party logistics selection problem: A literature review on criteria and methods. Omega - International Journal of Management Science, 49, 69–78.10.1016/j.omega.2014.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmadi, H., Nilashi, M., & Ibrahim, O. (2015). Organizational decision to adopt hospital information system: An empirical investigation in the case of Malaysian public hospitals. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 84, 166–188.10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.12.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alimardani, M., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Aghdaie, M. H., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2013). A novel hybrid SWARA and VIKOR methodology for supplier selection in an agile environment. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19, 533–548.10.3846/20294913.2013.814606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amiri, M., Zandieh, M., Soltani, R., & Vahdani, B. (2009). A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model for firms competence evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 12314–12322.10.1016/j.eswa.2009.04.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antucheviciene, J., Kala, Z., Marzouk, M., & Vaidogas, E. R. (2015). Solving civil engineering problems by means of fuzzy and stochastic MCDM methods: Current state and future research. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, Article ID 362579, 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arrow, K. J. (1951). Social choice and individual values. New York, NY: Willey & Sons, Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Azadnia, A. H., Saman, M. Z. M., & Wong, K. Y. (2015). Sustainable supplier selection and order lot-sizing: An integrated multi-objective decision-making process. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 383–408.10.1080/00207543.2014.935827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balezentis, A., & Balezentis, T. (2011). An innovative multi–criteria supplier selection based on two-tuple MULTIMOORA and hybrid data. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 45, 37–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balin, A., Demirel, H., & Alarcin, F. (2015). A hierarchical structure for ship diesel engine trouble-shooting problem using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy VIKOR hybrid methods. Brodogradnja, 66, 54–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R. B., Albadvi, A., & Aghdasi, M. (2010). PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 200, 198–215.10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacharyya, S. C. (2012). Review of alternative methodologies for analysing off-grid electricity supply. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 677–694.10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bitarafan, M., Zolfani, S., Arefi, S. L., Zavadskas, E. K., & Mahmoudzadeh, A. (2014). Evaluation of real-time intelligent sensors for structural health monitoring of bridges based on SWARA–WASPAS; a case in Iran. The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering, 9, 333–340.10.3846/bjrbe.2014.40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brauers, W. K. (2004). Optimization methods for a stakeholder society, a revolution in economic thinking by multi-objective optimization. London: Kluwer Academic.10.1007/978-1-4419-9178-2
   Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan, G., & Çifçi, G. (2012). A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green supplier. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 3000–3011.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan, G., Arsenyan, J., & Ruan, D. (2012). Logistics tool selection with two-phase fuzzy multi criteria decision making: A case study for personal digital assistant selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 142–153.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celik, E., Gul, M., Aydin, N., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2015). A comprehensive review of multi criteria decision making approaches based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Knowledge-Based Systems, 85, 329–341.10.1016/j.knosys.2015.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chai, J., Liu, J. N. K., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2013). Application of decision–making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 3872–3885.10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, K.-L. (2015). A hybrid program projects selection model for nonprofit TV stations. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, Article ID 368212, 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, F.-H. (2015). Application of a hybrid dynamic MCDM to explore the key factors for the internal control of procurement circulation. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 2951–2969.10.1080/00207543.2014.961210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J.-K., & Chen, I.-S. (2010). Aviatic innovation system construction using a hybrid fuzzy MCDM model. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 8387–8394.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J.-K., & Chen, I.-S. (2015). The assessment of intellectual capital for the information and communication technology industry in Taiwan applying a hybrid MCDM model. European Journal of International Management, 9, 88–107.10.1504/EJIM.2015.066673
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, F.-H., Hsu, T.-S., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2011). A balanced scorecard approach to establish a performance evaluation and relationship model for hot spring hotels based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DEMATEL and ANP. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 908–932.10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C.-R., Huang, C.-C., & Tsuei, H.-J. (2014). A hybrid MCDM model for improving GIS-based solar farms site selection. International Journal of Photoenergy, 2014, Article ID 925370, 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., Lien, H.-P., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2010). Measures and evaluation for environment watershed plans using a novel hybrid MCDM model. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 926–938.10.1016/j.eswa.2009.04.068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, T., & Sun, K.-S. (2012). Exploring the strategy to improve senior citizens’ participations on recreational sports. Knowledge-Based Systems, 26, 86–92.10.1016/j.knosys.2011.07.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C.-H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2011). Creating the aspired intelligent assessment systems for teaching materials. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 12168–12179.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, W.-C., Wang, L.-Y., & Lin, M.-C. (2015). A hybrid MCDM model for new product development: Applied on the Taiwanese LiFePO4 industry. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, Article ID 462929, 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Chithambaranathan, P., Subramanian, N., Gunasekaran, A., & Palaniappan, P. L. K. (2015). Service supply chain environmental performance evaluation using grey based hybrid MCDM approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 163–176.10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou, W.-C., & Cheng, Y.-P. (2012). A hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating website quality of professional accounting firms. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 2783–2793.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chuang, H.-M., Lin, C.-Y., & Chen, Y.-S. (2015). Exploring the triple reciprocity nature of organizational value cocreation behavior using multicriteria decision making analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, Article ID 206312, 1–15.10.1155/2015/206312
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chuang, H.-M., Lin, C.-K., Chen, D.-R., & Chen, Y.-S. (2013). Evolving MCDM applications using hybrid expert-based ISM and DEMATEL models: An example of sustainable ecotourism. The Scientific World Journal, 2013, Article ID 751728, 1–18.10.1155/2013/751728
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chyu, C.-C., & Fang, Y.-C. (2014). A hybrid fuzzy analytic network process approach to the new product development selection problem. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2014, Article ID 485016, 1–13.10.1155/2014/485016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cid-López, A., Hornos, M. J., Carrasco, R. A., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). A hybrid model for decision-making in the information and communications technology sector. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 21, 720–737.10.3846/20294913.2015.1056281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dağdeviren, M. (2010). A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model for personnel selection in manufacturing systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 21, 451–460.10.1007/s10845-008-0200-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danzig, G. B. (1948).Linear programming in problems for the numerical analysis of the future. Proceedings of the Symposium on Modern Calculating Machinery and Numerical Methods, UCLA, July 29-31.
   Google Scholar
• De Condorcet, M. (1785). Essay on the application of analysis to the probability of majority decisions. Paris: Bibliotheque National de France.
   Google Scholar
• Debreu, G. (1959). Theory of value: An axiomatic analysis of economic equilibrium. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Durmusoglu, Z. D. U. (2014). A hybrid MCDM for private primary school assessment using DEMATEL based on ANP and fuzzy cognitive map. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 7, 615–635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebrahimian, A., Ardeshir, A., Zahedi Rad, I. Z., & Ghodsypour, S. H. (2015). Urban stormwater construction method selection using a hybrid multi–criteria approach. Automation in Construction, 58, 118–128.10.1016/j.autcon.2015.07.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ecer, F. (2015). Performance evaluation of internet banking branches via a hybrid MCDM model under fuzzy environment. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 49, 211–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edgeworth, F. Y. (1881). Mathematical psychics: An essay on the application of mathematics to the moral sciences. London: Kegan Paul &.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 41, 380–417.10.1037/h0053870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetanat, A., & Khorasaninejad, E. (2015). A novel hybrid MCDM approach for offshore wind farm site selection: A case study of Iran. Ocean & Coastal Management, 109, 17–28.10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueira, J., Greco, S., & Ehrgott, M. (Eds.). (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art survey. Boston, MA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fishburn, P. C. (1970). Utility theory for decision making. New York, NY: Publications in Operations Research, N18, Wiley & Sons, .
   Google Scholar
• Fouladgar, M. M., Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Zavadskas, E. K., & Haji Moini, S. H. H. (2012). A new hybrid model for evaluating the working strategies: Case study of construction company. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18, 164–188.10.3846/20294913.2012.667270
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, B. (1772). Letter to Joseph Priestley. New York, NY: Fawcett. Reprinted in the Benjamin Franklin Sampler, 1956.
   Google Scholar
• Frisch, R. (1961). Numerical determination of a quadratic preference function for use in macroeconomic programming. Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia, 20, 3–43.
   Google Scholar
• Fu, G. L., Yang, C., & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). A multicriteria analysis on the strategies to open Taiwan's mobile virtual network operators services. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 6, 85–112.10.1142/S0219622007002320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gass, S., & Saaty, T. (1955). Parametric objective function, part II. Operations Research, 3, 316–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gay, L. F., & Sinha, S. K. (2013). Resilience of civil infrastructure systems: Literature review for improved asset management. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 9, 330–350.10.1504/IJCIS.2013.058172
   Google Scholar
• Ghassemi, S. A., & Danesh, S. (2013). A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for desalination process selection. Desalination, 313, 44–50.10.1016/j.desal.2012.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan, K., Diabat, A., & Madan Shankar, K. M. (2015). Analyzing the drivers of green manufacturing with fuzzy approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 182–193.10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan, K., & Jepsen, M. B. (2016). ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 250(1), 1–29.10.1016/j.ejor.2015.07.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan, K., Kannan, D., & Shankar, K. M. (2014). Evaluating the drivers of corporate social responsibility in the mining industry with multi–criteria approach: A multi–stakeholder perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84, 214–232.10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan, K., Kannan, D., & Shankar, Madan (2015). Evaluation of green manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with PROMETHEE. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 6344–6371.10.1080/00207543.2014.898865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan, K., Rajendran, S., Sarkis, J., & Murugesan, P. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66–83.10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guijarro, M., & Pajares, G. (2009). On combining classifiers through a fuzzy multicriteria decision making approach: Applied to natural textured images. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7262–7269.10.1016/j.eswa.2008.09.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, X., Zhu, Z., & Shi, J. (2014). Integration of semi-fuzzy SVDD and CC-Rule method for supplier selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 2083–2097.10.1016/j.eswa.2013.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gürbüz, T., & Albayrak, Y. E. (2014). An engineering approach to human resources performance evaluation: Hybrid MCDM application with interactions. Applied Soft Computing, 21, 365–375.10.1016/j.asoc.2014.03.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gürbüz, T., Albayrak, Y. E., & Alaybeyoğlu, E. (2014). Criteria weighting and 4p's planning in marketing using a fuzzy metric distance and AHP hybrid method. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 7(Suppl. 1), 94–104.10.1080/18756891.2014.853936
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacioglu, U., & Dincer, H. (2015). A comparative performance evaluation on bipolar risks in emerging capital markets using fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS and VIKOR approaches. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 26, 118–129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Aghdaie, M. H., Derakhti, A., Zavadskas, E. K., & Morshed Varzandeh, M. H. M. (2013a). Decision making on business issues with foresight perspective, an application of new hybrid MCDM model in shopping mall locating. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 7111–7121.10.1016/j.eswa.2013.06.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., & Antucheviciene, J. (2012). Team member selecting based on AHP and TOPSIS grey. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 23, 425–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Maknoon, R., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). Multiple nash equilibriums and evaluation of strategies. New application of MCDM methods. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 16, 290–306.10.3846/16111699.2014.967715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Rezaeiniy, N., Aghdaie, M. H., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012b). Quality control manager selection based on AHP, COPRAS–G methods: A case in Iran. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 25, 88–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Rezaeiniya, N., Pourhossein, M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012c). Decision making on advertisement strategy selection based on life cycle of products by applying FAHP and TOPSIS grey: Growth stage perspective, a case about food industry in Iran. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 23, 471–484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Rezaeiniya, N., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). Forest roads locating based on AHP and COPRAS–G methods: An empirical study based on Iran. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 14, 6–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic in multi-criteria decision making. The 50th anniversary of Prof. Lotfi Zadeh's theory: Introduction. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 21, 677–683.10.3846/20294913.2015.1084956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202, 16–24.10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, W. (2015). A fuzzy multiple-criteria decision-making system for analyzing gaps of service quality. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 17, 256–267.10.1007/s40815-015-0018-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C.-W., Kuo, T.-C., Shyu, G.-S., & Chen, P.-S. (2014). Low carbon supplier selection in the hotel industry. Sustainability, 6, 2658–2684.10.3390/su6052658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C.-C., Liou, J. J. H., & Chuang, Y.-C. (2013). Integrating DANP and modified grey relation theory for the selection of an outsourcing provider. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 2297–2304.10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. H., Wang, F.-K., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2012). The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 66, 95–111.10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, S.-K., Lu, M.-T., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2014). Exploring smart phone improvements based on a hybrid MCDM model. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 4401–4413.10.1016/j.eswa.2013.12.052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, Y.-H., Huang, T.-L., Hsieh, J.-C., Tsuei, H. J., Cheng, C. C., & Tzeng, G. H. (2012). Online reputation management for improving marketing by using a hybrid MCDM model. Knowledge-Based Systems, 35, 87–93.10.1016/j.knosys.2012.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, C.-L., & Masud, A. S. M. (1979). Multiple objective decision making – methods and application. A State-of-the-Art Survey. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-45511-7
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attributes decision making methods and applications. Berlin, Hedelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
   Google Scholar
• Ibáñez-Forés, V., Bovea, M. D., & Pérez-Belis, V. (2014). A holistic review of applied methodologies for assessing and selecting the optimal technological alternative from a sustainability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 70, 259–281.10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ignatius, J., Motlagh, S. M. H., Sepehri, M. M., Behzadian, M., & Mustafa, A. (2010). Hybrid models in decision making under uncertainty: The case of training provider evaluation. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 21, 147–162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilangkumaran, M., Karthikeyan, M., Ramachandran, T., Boopathiraja, M., & Kirubakaran, B. (2015). Risk analysis and warning rate of hot environment for foundry industry using hybrid MCDM technique. Safety Science, 72, 133–143.10.1016/j.ssci.2014.08.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingwersen, W., Cabezas, H., Weisbrod, A. V., Eason, T., Demeke, B., Ma, X.(C.), … Ceja, M. (2014). Integrated metrics for improving the life cycle approach to assessing product system sustainability. Sustainability, 6, 1386–1413.10.3390/su6031386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jato-Espino, D., Castillo-Lopez, E., Rodriguez-Hernandez, J., & Canteras-Jordana, J. C. (2014). A review of application of multi–criteria decision making methods in construction. Automation in Construction, 45, 151–162.10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeng, D. J.-F., & Bailey, T. (2012). Assessing customer retention strategies in mobile telecommunications: Hybrid MCDM approach. Management Decision, 50, 1570–1595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeng, D. J.-F., & Huang, K.-H. (2015). Strategic project portfolio selection for national research institutes. Journal of Business Research, 68, 2305–2311.10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabak, M. (2013). A Fuzzy DEMATEL–ANP based multi criteria decision making approach for personnel selection. Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing, 20, 571–593.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabak, M., & Dağdeviren, M. (2014a). A hybrid MCDM approach to assess the sustainability of students’ preferences for university selection. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20, 391–418.10.3846/20294913.2014.883340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabak, M., & Dağdeviren, M. (2014b). Prioritization of renewable energy sources for Turkey by using a hybrid MCDM methodology. Energy Conversion and Management, 79, 25–33.10.1016/j.enconman.2013.11.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabak, M., Köse, E., Kırılmaz, O., & Burmaoğlu, S. (2014). A fuzzy multi–criteria decision making approach to assess building energy performance. Energy and Buildings, 72, 382–389.10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.12.059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabir, G., Sadiq, R., & Tesfamariam, S. (2014). A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management. Structure and infrastructure engineering: Maintenance, management. Life–Cycle Design and Performance, 10, 1176–1210.10.1080/15732479.2013.795978
   Google Scholar
• Kannan, D., Govindan, K., & Rajendran, S. (2015). Fuzzy axiomatic design approach based green supplier selection: A case study from Singapore. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 194–208.10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kantorovich, L. (1960). Mathematical methods of organizing and planning production. Management Science, 6, 363–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasirian, M. N., & Yusuff, R. M. (2013). An integration of a hybrid modified TOPSIS with a PGP model for the supplier selection with interdependent criteria. International Journal of Production Research, 51, 1037–1054.10.1080/00207543.2012.663107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keršulienė, V., & Turskis, Z. (2014). A hybrid linguistic fuzzy multiple criteria group selection of a chief accounting officer. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 15, 232–252.10.3846/16111699.2014.903201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khalili Esbouei, S., Safaei Ghadikolaei, A., & Antucheviciene, J. (2014). Using FANP and fuzzy VIKOR for ranking manufacturing companies based on their financial performance. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 48, 141–162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Köksalan, M., Wallenius, J., & Zionts, S. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making to the 21st century. Singapore: World Scientific.10.1142/8042
   Google Scholar
• Koopmans, T. C. (1951). Analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities. In T. C. Koopmans (Ed.), Activity analysis of production and allocation (pp. 404). Heidelberg: Physica Verlog.
   Google Scholar
• Kuo, M.-S. (2011). Optimal location selection for an international distribution center by using a new hybrid method. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 7208–7221.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, T. C., Hsu, C. W., & Li, J. Y. (2015). Developing a green supplier selection model by using the DANP with VIKOR. Sustainability, 7, 1661–1689.10.3390/su7021661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, M.-S., & Liang, G.-S. (2011). A novel hybrid decision-making model for selecting locations in a fuzzy environment. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 54, 88–104.10.1016/j.mcm.2011.01.038
   Google Scholar
• Lashgari, A., Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Fouladgar, M. M., Zavadskas, E. K., Shafiee, S., & Abbate, N. (2012). Equipment selection using fuzzy multi criteria decision making model: Key study of Gole Gohar iron mine. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 23, 125–136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, W.-S. (2014). A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR for the selection of location — real estate brokerage services. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 13, 197–224.10.1142/S0219622014500333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. K., Mogi, G., & Hui, K. S. (2013). A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP)/data envelopment analysis (DEA) hybrid model for efficiently allocating energy R&D resources: In the case of energy technologies against high oil prices. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 21, 347–355.10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, B. G., Seo, H., Om, S. Y., Oh, J., & Seol, J. (2012). Developing a strategic framework for the WiBro service in the global market. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 61, 131–144.10.1007/s11042-010-0705-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao, S., Wu, M.-J., Huang, Ch. -Y, Kao, Y.-S., & Lee, T.-H. (2014). Evaluating and enhancing three-dimensional printing service providers for rapid prototyping using the DEMATEL based network process and VIKOR. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2014, Article ID 349348, 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, C.-L. (2015). A novel hybrid decision–making model for determining product position under consideration of dependence and feedback. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 39, 2194–2216.10.1016/j.apm.2014.10.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, C.-L., Hsieh, M.-S., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2010a). Evaluating vehicle telematics system by using a novel MCDM technique with dependence and feedback. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 6723–6736.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.01.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, Y.-T., Lin, C.-L., Yu, H.-C., & Tzeng, G. H. (2010b). A novel hybrid MCDM approach for outsourcing vendor selection: A case study for a semiconductor company in Taiwan. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 4796–4804.10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, S.-J., Wang, C.-S., & Hsu, M.-F. (2014). Selection of multiple combination strategies for risk assessment. Cybernetics and Systems, 45, 622–634.10.1080/01969722.2014.970395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, J. J. H. (2013). New concepts and trends of MCDM for tomorrow – in honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on the occasion of his 70th birthday. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19, 367–375.10.3846/20294913.2013.811037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, J. J. H., Chuang, Y. C., & Tzeng, G. H. (2014b). A fuzzy integral–based model for supplier evaluation and improvement. Information Sciences, 266, 199–217.10.1016/j.ins.2013.09.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, J. J. H., Hsu, C.-C., & Chen, Y.-S. (2014a). Improving transportation service quality based on information fusion. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67, 225–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, J. J. H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2012). Comments on “Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: An overview”. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18, 672–695.10.3846/20294913.2012.753489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, J. J. H., Wang, H. S., Hsu, C. C., & Yin, S. L. (2011). A hybrid model for selection of an outsourcing provider. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 35, 5121–5133.10.1016/j.apm.2011.04.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C.-H., Tzeng, G.-H., & Lee, M.-H. (2012). Improving tourism policy implementation – The use of hybrid MCDM models. Tourism Management, 33, 413–426.10.1016/j.tourman.2011.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H.-C., You, J.-X., Lu, C., & Chen, Y.-Z. (2015a). Evaluating health-care waste treatment technologies using a hybrid multi-criteria decision making model. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 932–942.10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H.-C., You, J.-X., You, X.-Y., & Shan, M.-M. (2015b). A novel approach for failure mode and effects analysis using combination weighting and fuzzy VIKOR method. Applied Soft Computing, 28, 579–588.10.1016/j.asoc.2014.11.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H.-C., You, J.-X., Zhen, L., & Fan, X.-J. (2014). A novel hybrid multiple criteria decision making model for material selection with target-based criteria. Materials & Design, 60, 380–390.10.1016/j.matdes.2014.03.071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, M.-T., Hu, S.-K., Huang, L.-H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2015a). Evaluating the implementation of business-to-business m-commerce by SMEs based on a new hybrid MADM model. Management Decision, 53, 290–317.10.1108/MD-01-2014-0012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, M.-T., Lin, S.-W., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2013a). Improving RFID adoption in Taiwan’s healthcare industry based on a DEMATEL technique with a hybrid MCDM model. Decision Support Systems, 56, 259–269.10.1016/j.dss.2013.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, M.-T., Tzeng, G.-H., Cheng, H., & Hsu, C.-C. (2015b). Exploring mobile banking services for user behavior in intention adoption: Using new hybrid MADM model. Service Business, 9, 541–565.10.1007/s11628-014-0239-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, M.-T., Tzeng, G.-H., & Tang, L.-L. (2013b). Environmental strategic orientations for improving green innovation performance in fuzzy environment – using new fuzzy hybrid MCDM model. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 15, 297–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions: Introduction and critical survey. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., MD Nor, K. M. D., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., & Valipour, A. (2015). Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications – A review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28, 516–571.10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). Fuzzy multiple criteria decision–making techniques and applications – Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, 4126–4148.10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Cavallaro, F., & Khalifah, Z. (2015). Sustainable and renewable energy: An overview of the application of multiple criteria decision making techniques and approaches. Sustainability, 7, 13947–13984.10.3390/su71013947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesghouni, K., Pesin, P., Trentesaux, D., Hammadi, S., Tahon, C., & Borne, P. (1999). Hybrid approach to decision-making for job-shop scheduling. Production Planning & Control, 10, 690–706.10.1080/095372899232768
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nash, J. (1950). Equilibrium points in n person games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 36, 48–49.10.1073/pnas.36.1.48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen, H.-T., Dawal, S. Z. M., Nukman, Y., & Aoyama, H. (2014). A hybrid approach for fuzzy multi-attribute decision making in machine tool selection with consideration of the interactions of attributes. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 3078–3090.10.1016/j.eswa.2013.10.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen, H.-T., Dawal, S. Z. Md., Nukman, Y., Aoyama, H., Case, K. (2015). An integrated approach of fuzzy linguistic preference based AHP and fuzzy COPRAS for machine tool evaluation. PLoS ONE, 10 e0133599, 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilashi, M., Zakaria, R., Ibrahim, O., Majid, M. Z., Zin, R. M., & Farahmand, M. (2015). MCPCM: A DEMATEL-ANP-based multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate the critical success factors in construction projects. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 40, 343–361.10.1007/s13369-014-1529-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Önut, S., Kara, S. S., & Efendigil, T. (2008). A hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach to machine tool selection. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 19, 443–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdemir, U., & Guneroglu, A. (2015). Strategic approach model for investigating the cause of maritime accidents. PROMET – Trafic&Transportation, 27, 113–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pareto, V. (1896). Cours E-economic. Rouge: Univerite de Lausanne.
   Google Scholar
• Peng, K.-H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2013). A hybrid dynamic MADM model for problem-improvement in economics and business. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19, 638–660.10.3846/20294913.2013.837114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perera, A. T. D., Attalage, R. A., Perera, K. K. C. K., & Dassanayake, V. P. C. (2013). A hybrid tool to combine multi-objective optimization and multi-criterion decision making in designing standalone hybrid energy systems. Applied Energy, 107, 412–425.10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pourahmad, A., Hosseini, A., Banaitis, A., Nasiri, H., Banaitienė, N., & Tzeng, G. H. (2015). Combination of fuzzy–AHP and DEMATEL–ANP with GIS in a new hybrid MCDM model used for the selection of the best space for leisure in a blighted urban site. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 21, 773–796.10.3846/20294913.2015.1056279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabbani, A., Zamani, M., Yazdani-Chamzini, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2014). Proposing a new integrated model based on sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC) and MCDM approaches by using linguistic variables for the performance evaluation of oil producing companies. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 7316–7327.10.1016/j.eswa.2014.05.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsey, F. P. (1931). Truth and probability. In R. B. Braithwaite (Ed.), The foundations of mathematics and other logical essays (pp. 156–198). London: Routledge and Kegan.
   Google Scholar
• Rezaeiniya, N., Zolfani, S., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012). Greenhouse locating based on ANP–COPRAS–G methods – an empirical study based on Iran. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 16, 188–200.10.3846/1648715X.2012.686459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, R. A., Moreira, A. M., van den Broek, P., & Pimentel, A. (2011). Hybrid assessment method for software engineering decisions. Decision Support Systems, 51, 208–219.10.1016/j.dss.2010.12.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostamzadeh, R., Govindan, K., Esmaeili, A., & Sabaghi, M. (2015). Application of fuzzy VIKOR for evaluation of green supply chain management practices. Ecological Indicators, 49, 188–203.10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostamzadeh, R., Ismail, K., & Bodaghi Khajeh Noubar, H. B. K. (2014). An application of a hybrid MCDM method for the evaluation of entrepreneurial intensity among the SMEs: A case study. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, Article ID 703650, 1–16.10.1155/2014/703650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostamzadeh, R., Sabaghi, M., Sofian, S., & Ismail, Z. (2015). Hybrid GA for material routing optimization in supply chain. Applied Soft Computing, 26, 107–122.10.1016/j.asoc.2014.09.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouyendegh, B. D. (2015). Developing an integrated ANP and intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS model for supplier selection. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 43(3), 1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy, B. (1968). La methode ELECTRE [ELECTRE method]. Revue d’Informatique et. de Recherche Operationelle (RIRO), 8, 57–75.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, B. (1996). Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1
   Google Scholar
• Roya, M. A., & Niaki, S. T. A. (2014). A hybrid approach based on locally linear neuro-fuzzy modeling and TOPSIS to determine the quality grade of gas well-drilling projects. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 114, 99–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback. The Analytic Network Process. Pitsburg: RWS Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L., & Ergu, D. (2015). When is a decision-making method trustworthy? criteria for evaluating multi-criteria decision-making methods. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 14, 1171–1187.10.1142/S021962201550025X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Safaei Ghadikolaei, A., Khalili Esbouei, S., & Antucheviciene, J. (2014). Applying fuzzy MCDM for financial performance evaluation of Iranian companies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20, 274–291.10.3846/20294913.2014.913274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakthivel, G., Ilangkumaran, M., Nagarajan, G., & Shanmugam, P. (2013). Selection of best biodiesel blend for IC engines: An integrated approach with FAHP–TOPSIS and FAHP–VIKOR. International Journal of Oil Gas and Coal Technology, 6, 581–612.10.1504/IJOGCT.2013.056153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelson, P. A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer's behaviour. Economica, 5, 61–71.10.2307/2548836
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1970). Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco: Holden Day.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, Y.-C., Lin, G. T. R., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2011). Combined DEMATEL techniques with novel MCDM for the organic light emitting diode technology selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 1468–1481.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, K.-Y., & Tzeng, G.,-H. (2015a). A decision rule-based soft computing model for supporting financial performance improvement of the banking industry. Soft Computing, 19, 859–874.10.1007/s00500-014-1413-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, K.-Y., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2015b). A new approach and insightful financial diagnoses for the IT industry based on a hybrid MADM model. Knowledge-Based Systems, 85, 112–130.10.1016/j.knosys.2015.04.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shyur, H.-J., & Shih, H.-S. (2006). A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 44, 749–761.10.1016/j.mcm.2005.04.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.10.2307/1884852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su, Z.-X. (2011). A hybrid fuzzy approach to fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 10, 695–711.10.1142/S021962201100452X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suganthi, L., Iniyan, S., & Samuel, A. A. (2015). Applications of fuzzy logic in renewable energy systems – A review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 48, 585–607.10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tadić, S., Zečević, S., & Krstić, M. (2014). A novel hybrid MCDM model based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy VIKOR for city logistics concept selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 8112–8128.10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., & Abtahi, A.-R. (2013a). A hybrid fuzzy group decision support framework for advanced-technology prioritization at NASA. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 480–491.10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., & Rahmatian, R. (2015). A hybrid fuzzy MCDM method for measuring the performance of publicly held pharmaceutical companies. Annals of Operations Research, 226, 589–621.10.1007/s10479-014-1738-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Momeni, E., Rezaeiniya, N., Mirhedayatian, S. M., & Rezaeiniya, H. (2013b). A novel hybrid social media platform selection model using fuzzy ANP and COPRAS–G. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 5694–5702.10.1016/j.eswa.2013.05.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Zandi, F., & Katehakis, M. N. (2013c). A hybrid fuzzy group ANP–TOPSIS framework for assessment of e-government readiness from a CiRM perspective. Information & Management, 50, 383–397.10.1016/j.im.2013.05.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triantaphyllou, E. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., Chou, Y.-W., Lee, K.-C., Lin, W.-R., & Hwang, E. T. Y. (2013). Combining decision making trial and evaluation laboratory with analytic network process to perform an investigation of information technology auditing and risk control in an enterprise resource planning environment. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 30, 176–193.10.1002/sres.v30.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., Chou, W.-C., & Leu, J.-D. (2011). An effectiveness evaluation model for the web-based marketing of the airline industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 15499–15516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., & Hsu, W. (2010). A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL and ANP for selecting cost of quality model development. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21, 439–456.10.1080/14783361003606852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., Hsu, J.-L., Chen, C.-H., Lin, W. R., & Chen, S. P. (2010b). An integrated approach for selecting corporate social responsibility programs and costs evaluation in the international tourist hotel. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29, 385–396.10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-C. (2011). Entrepreneurship policy evaluation and decision analysis for SMEs. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 8343–8351.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W.-H., Lee, P.-L., Shen, Y.-S., & Hwang, E. T. Y. (2014). A combined evaluation model for encouraging entrepreneurship policies. Annals of Operations Research, 221, 449–468.10.1007/s10479-011-1029-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W. H., Leu, J. D., Liu, J. Y., Lin, S. J., & Shaw, M. J. (2010a). A MCDM approach for sourcing strategy mix decision in IT projects. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 3870–3886.10.1016/j.eswa.2009.11.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, M.-L. (2011a). Using a hybrid MCDM model to evaluate firm environmental knowledge management in uncertainty. Applied Soft Computing, 11, 1340–1352.10.1016/j.asoc.2010.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, M.-L. (2011b). Using hybrid MCDM to evaluate the service quality expectation in linguistic preference. Applied Soft Computing, 11, 4551–4562.10.1016/j.asoc.2011.08.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsui, C.-W., Tzeng, G.-H., & Wen, U.-P. (2015). A hybrid MCDM approach for improving the performance of green suppliers in the TFT–LCD industry. International Journal of Production Research, 53, 6436–6454.10.1080/00207543.2014.935829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzeng, G.-H., Chiang, C.-H., & Li, C.-W. (2007). Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Systems with Applications, 32, 1028–1044.10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzeng, G.-H., & Huang, J.-J. (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tzeng, G.-H., & Huang, C.-Y. (2012). Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems. Annals of Operations Research, 197, 159–190.10.1007/s10479-010-0829-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzeng, G.-H., & Huang, J.-J. (2013). Fuzzy multiple objective decision making. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.10.1201/b15337
   Google Scholar
• Uygun, Özer, Kaçamak, H., & Kahraman, Ünal Atakan (2015a). An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 86, 137–146.10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uygun, Özer, Canvar Kahveci, T. C., Taşkın, H., & Piriştine, B. (2015b). Readiness assessment model for institutionalization of SMEs using fuzzy hybrid MCDM techniques. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 88, 217–228.10.1016/j.cie.2015.07.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vafaeipour, M., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Morshed Varzandeh, M. H. M., Derakhti, A., & Keshavarz Eshkalag, M. K. (2014). Assessment of regions priority for implementation of solar projects in Iran: New application of a hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach. Energy Conversion and Management, 86, 653–663.10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valipour, A., Yahaya, N., Md Noor, N., Kildienė, S., Sarvari, H., & Mardani, A. (2015). A fuzzy analytic network process method for risk prioritization in freeway PPP projects: An Iranian case study. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 21, 933–947.10.3846/13923730.2015.1051104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinodh, S., Prasanna, M., & Hari Prakash, N. (2014). Integrated Fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS for selecting the best plastic recycling method: A case study. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38, 4662–4672.10.1016/j.apm.2014.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behaviour. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, T.-C. (2012). The interactive trade decision-making research: An application case of novel hybrid MCDM model. Economic Modelling, 29, 926–935.10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, F.-K., Hsu, C.-H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2014). Applying a hybrid MCDM model for six sigma project selection. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2014, Article ID 730934, 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, W.-M., Lee, A. H. I., Peng, L.-P., & Wu, Z.-L. (2013). An integrated decision making model for district revitalization and regeneration project selection. Decision Support Systems, 54, 1092–1103.10.1016/j.dss.2012.10.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y.-L., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2012). Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and VIKOR methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 5600–5615.10.1016/j.eswa.2011.11.057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C.-S., Yang, H.-L., & Lin, S.-L. (2015). To make good decision: A group DSS for multiple criteria alternative rank and selection. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, Article ID 186970, 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Wiecek, M. M., Matthiasehrgott, M., Fadel, G., & Ruifigueira, J. R. (2008). Multiple criteria decision making for engineering. Omega - International Journal of Management Science, 36, 337–339.10.1016/j.omega.2006.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, H.-Y., Chen, J.-K., Chen, I.-S., & Zhuo, H. H. (2012). Ranking universities based on performance evaluation by a hybrid MCDM model. Measurement, 45, 856–880.10.1016/j.measurement.2012.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, C. M., Hsieh, C. L., & Chang, K. L. (2013). A hybrid multiple criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2013, Article ID 324283, 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, K.-J., Liao, C.-J., Tseng, M.-L., & Chiu, A. S. F. (2015). Exploring decisive factors in green supply chain practices under uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 147–157.10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.09.030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, H.-Y., Lin, Y.-K., & Chang, C.-H. (2011). Performance evaluation of extension education centers in universities based on the balanced scorecard. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34, 37–50.10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yager, R. R. (2015). Foreword. special issue on fuzzy sets and applications (celebration of the 50th anniversary of fuzzy sets). International Journal of Computers ommunications & Control, 10, 771–771.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, J., & Tzeng, G. (2011). An integrated MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 1417–1424.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, C.-L., Yuan, B. J. C., & Huang, C.-Y. (2015). Key determinant derivations for information technology disaster recovery site selection by the multi-criterion decision making method. Sustainability, 7, 6149–6188.10.3390/su7056149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Shariati, S., Yakhchali, S. H., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2014). Proposing a new methodology for prioritising the investment strategies in the private sector of Iran. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 27, 320–345.
   Google Scholar
• Yeh, T.-M., Pai, F.-Y., & Liao, C.-W. (2014). Using a hybrid MCDM methodology to identify critical factors in new product development. Neural Computing & Applications, 24, 957–971.10.1007/s00521-012-1314-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 338–353.10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zare, M., Pahl, C., Rahnama, H., Nilashi, M., Mardani, A., Ibrahim, O., & Ahmadi, H. (2016). Multi-criteria decision making approach in E-learning: A systematic review and classification. Applied Soft Computing, 45, 108–128.10.1016/j.asoc.2016.04.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zavadskas, E. K., Liias, R., & Turskis, Z. (2008). Multi-attribute decision-making methods for assessment of quality in bridges and road construction: State-of-the-art surveys. The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering, 3, 152–160.10.3846/1822-427X.2008.3.152-160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zavadskas, E., Peldschus, F., & Kaklauskas, A. (1994). Multiple criteria evaluation of projects in construction. Vilnius: Technika.
   Google Scholar
• Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: An overview. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17, 397–427.10.3846/20294913.2011.593291
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20, 165–179.10.3846/20294913.2014.892037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Volvačiovas, R., & Kildienė, S. (2013). Multi-criteria assessment model of technologies. Studies in Informatics and Control, 22, 249–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zelany, M. (1974). A concept of compromise solution and the method of displaced ideal. Computers and Operations Research, 1, 479–496.10.1016/0305-0548(74)90064-1
   Google Scholar
• Zeleny, M. (1975). MCDM - state and future of arts. Operations Research, 23( Suppl. 2), B413–B413.
   Google Scholar
• Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple criteria decision making. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, H., & Guo, S. (2014). Selecting green supplier of thermal power equipment by using a hybrid MCDM method for sustainability. Sustainability, 6, 217–235.10.3390/su6010217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, H., & Guo, S. (2015). External benefit evaluation of renewable energy power in China for sustainability. Sustainability, 7, 4783–4805.10.3390/su7054783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zionts, S. (1979). MCDM - if not a Roman numeral, then what. Interfaces, 9, 94–101.10.1287/inte.9.4.94
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zolfani, S., Chen, I.-S., Rezaeiniya, N., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2012a). A hybrid MCDM model encompassing AHP and COPRAS–G methods for selecting company supplier in Iran. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18, 529–543.10.3846/20294913.2012.709472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zolfani, S., Esfahani, M. H., Bitarafan, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Arefi, S. L. (2013b). Developing a new hybrid MCDM method for selection of the optimal alternative of mechanical longitudinal ventilation of tunnel pollutants during automobile accidents. Transport, 28, 89–96.10.3846/16484142.2013.782567
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zopounidis, C., & Pardalos, P. M. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of multicriteria analysis. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar