Why, when, and how to combine system dynamics with other methods: Towards an evidence-based framework

References

• Adamides, E. D., Mitropoulos, P., Giannikos, I., & Mitropoulos, I. (2009). A multi methodological approach to the development of a regional solid waste management system. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(6), 758–770.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, E. G. (2011). A dynamic model of counterinsurgency policy including the effects of intelligence, public security, popular support, and insurgent experience. System Dynamics Review, 27(2), 111–141.10.1002/sdr.v27.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, E. G., Morrice, D. J., & Lundeen, G. (2005). The “physics” of capacity and backlog management in service and custom manufacturing supply chains. System Dynamics Review, 21(3), 217–247.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auping, W. L., Pruyt, E., & Kwakkel, J. H. (2015). Societal ageing in the Netherlands: A robust system dynamics approach. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(4), 485–501.10.1002/sres.2340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azadeh, A., Darivandi Shoushtari, K., Saberi, M., & Teimoury, E. (2014). An Integrated artificial neural network and system dynamics approach in support of the viable system model to enhance industrial intelligence: The case of a large broiler industry. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(2), 236–257.10.1002/sres.v31.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barlas, Y. (1996). Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 12(3), 183–210.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barlas, Y., & Carpenter, S. (1990). Philosophical roots of model validation: Two paradigms. System Dynamics Review, 6(2), 148–166.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, P. G. (1985). On linking approaches to decision-aiding: Issues and prospects. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36(8), 659–669.10.1057/jors.1985.123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95–118). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brannen, J. (2005). Mixed methods research: A discussion paper. ( NCRM Methods Review Papers NCRM/005). Southampton, UK: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods.
   Google Scholar
• Briner, R. B., & Denyer, D. (2012). Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool. In The Oxford (Ed.), Rousseau DM (pp. 112–129). Oxford, UK: Handbook of Evidence-Based Management. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chahal, K., Eldabi, T., & Young, T. (2013). A conceptual framework for hybrid system dynamics and discrete event simulation for healthcare. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 26(1/2), 50–74.10.1108/17410391311289541
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., Tu, Y., & Jeng, B. (2011). A machine learning approach to policy optimization in system dynamics models. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28(4), 369–390.10.1002/sres.v28.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, H., Wakeland, W., & Yu, J. (2012). A two-stage technology foresight model with system dynamics simulation and its application in the Chinese ICT industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(7), 1254–1267.10.1016/j.techfore.2012.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coyle, R. G. (1985). The use of optimization methods for policy design in a system dynamics model. System Dynamics Review, 1(1), 81–91.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coyle, J. M., Exelby, D., & Holt, J. (1999). System dynamics in defence analysis: Some case studies. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(4), 372–382.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600711
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daim, T. U., Rueda, G., Martin, H., & Gerdsri, P. (2006). Forecasting emerging technologies: Use of bibliometrics and patent analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(8), 981–1012.10.1016/j.techfore.2006.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dangerfield, B., & Roberts, C. (1999). Optimisation as a statistical estimation tool an example in estimating the AIDS treatment-free incubation period distribution. System Dynamics Review, 15(3), 273–291.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolado, J. J. (1992). Qualitative simulation and system dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 8(1), 55–81.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggan, J. (2008). Equation-based policy optimization for agent-oriented system dynamics models. System Dynamics Review, 24(1), 97–118.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evenden, D., Harper, P. R., Brailsford, S. C., & Harindra, V. (2006). Improving the cost-effectiveness of Chlamydia screening with targeted screening strategies. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(12), 1400–1412.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiddaman, T. S. (2002). Exploring policy options with a behavioral climate–economy model. System Dynamics Review, 18(2), 243–267.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flood, R. L. (1995a). Solving Problem Solving: A Potent Force for Effective Management. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Flood, R. L. (1995b). Total Systems Intervention (TSI): A Reconstitution. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46(2), 174–191.10.1057/jors.1995.23
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Georgiadis, P., & Athanasiou, E. (2013). Flexible long-term capacity planning in closed-loop supply chains with remanufacturing. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1), 44–58.10.1016/j.ejor.2012.09.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, R. (1996). An integrated social fabric matrix/system dynamics approach to policy analysis. System Dynamics Review, 12(3), 167–181.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, J. C., & Hall, J. (2010). Dialectics and pragmatism: Being of consequence. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 119–143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hadjis, A. (2011). Bringing economy and robustness in parameter testing: A Taguchi methods-based approach to model validation. System Dynamics Review, 27(4), 374–391.10.1002/sdr.v27.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslett, T., & Sarah, R. (2006). Using the viable systems model to structure a system dynamics mapping and modeling project for the Australian taxation office. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 19(3), 273–290.10.1007/s11213-006-9017-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homer, J. B. (1999). Macro- and micro-modeling of field service dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 15(2), 139–162.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howick, S., & Ackermann, F. (2011). Mixing OR methods in practice: Past, present and future directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 215(3), 503–511.10.1016/j.ejor.2011.03.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howick, S., Ackermann, F., & Andersen, D. (2006). Linking event thinking with structural thinking: Methods to improve client value in projects. System Dynamics Review, 22(2), 113–140.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivankova, N. V., & Kawamura, Y. (2010). Emerging trends in the utilization of integrated designs in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.) Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 581–611). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M. C. (1997a). Critical systems thinking and information systems research. In J. Mingers & F. Stowell (Eds.), Information systems: An emerging discipline (pp. 201–230). London: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M. C. (1997b). Pluralism in systems thinking and practice. In J. Mingers & A. Gill (Eds.), Multimethodology: Theory and practice of combining management science methodologies (pp. 345–378). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Joglekar, N. R., & Ford, D. N. (2005). Product development resource allocation with foresight. European Journal of Operational Research, 160(1), 72–87.10.1016/j.ejor.2003.06.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Gray, R. (2010). A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 69–94). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kaempf, A., & Ninios, P. (1998). System dynamics: An umbrella for integrated problem solving. In Proceedings of the 1998 International System Dynamics Conference. Québec, Canada: System Dynamics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, H., & Andersen, D. F. (2012). Building confidence in causal maps generated from purposive text data: Mapping transcripts of the Federal Reserve. System Dynamics Review, 28(4), 311–328.10.1002/sdr.1480
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolominsky-Rabas, P. L., Djanatliev, A., Wahlster, P., Gantner-Bär, M., Hofmann, B., German, R., … Kriza, C. (2015). Technology foresight for medical device development through hybrid simulation: The ProHTA Project. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 97, 105–114.10.1016/j.techfore.2013.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotiadis, K., & Mingers, J. (2006). Combining PSMs with hard OR methods: The philosophical and practical challenges. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 856–867.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunsch, P., & Springael, J. (2008). Simulation with system dynamics and fuzzy reasoning of a tax policy to reduce CO2 emissions in the residential sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 185(3), 1285–1299.10.1016/j.ejor.2006.05.048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel, J. H., Auping, W. L., & Pruyt, E. (2013). Dynamic scenario discovery under deep uncertainty: The future of copper. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(4), 789–800.10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel, J. H., & Pruyt, E. (2013). Exploratory modeling and analysis, an approach for model–based foresight under deep uncertainty. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 419–431.10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel, J. H., & Pruyt, E. (2015). Using system dynamics for grand challenges: The ESDMA approach. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(3), 358–375.10.1002/sres.v32.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamberson, P. J. (2016). Winner-take-all or long tail?: A behavioral model of markets with increasing returns. System Dynamics Review, 32(3–4), 233–260.10.1002/sdr.1563
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, D. C. (2012). What is a ‘policy insight’? Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 29(6), 590–595.10.1002/sres.v29.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, D. C., & Oliva, R. (1998). The greater whole: Towards a synthesis of system dynamics and soft systems methodology. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(1), 214–235.10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00205-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopainsky, B., Tröger, K., Derwisch, S., & Ulli-Beer, S. (2012). Designing sustainable food security policies in sub-Saharan African countries: How social dynamics over-ride utility evaluations for good and bad. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 29(6), 575–589.10.1002/sres.v29.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lättilä, L., Hilletofth, P., & Lin, B. (2010). Hybrid simulation models – When, why, how? Expert Systems with Applications, 37(12), 7969–7975.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, D. H., Park, S. Y., Kim, J. W., & Lee, S. K. (2013). Analysis on the feedback effect for the diffusion of innovative technologies focusing on the green car. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 498–509.10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H., Howley, E., & Duggan, J. (2012). Co-evolutionary analysis: A policy exploration method for system dynamics models. System Dynamics Review, 28(4), 361–369.10.1002/sdr.1482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, S., Triantis, K. P., & Sarangi, S. (2011). Representing qualitative variables and their interactions with fuzzy logic in system dynamics modeling. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28(3), 245–263.10.1002/sres.v28.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macedo, J. (1989). A reference approach for policy optimization in system dynamics models. System Dynamics Review, 5(2), 148–175.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsland, N., Wilson, I. M., Abeyasekera, S., & Kleih, U. K. (2000). A methodological framework for combining quantitative and qualitative survey methods. Reading, UK: Statistical Services Centre, University of Reading.
   Google Scholar
• Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic intervention: Philosophy, methodology, and practice. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.10.1007/978-1-4615-4201-8
   Google Scholar
• Miller, B., & Clarke, J. (2007). The hidden value of air transportation infrastructure. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(1), 18–35.10.1016/j.techfore.2004.03.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mingers, J., & Brocklesby, J. (1997). Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies. Omega, 25(5), 489–509.10.1016/S0305-0483(97)00018-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mingers, J., & White, L. (2010). A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1147–1161.10.1016/j.ejor.2009.12.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohapatra, P. K. J., & Sharma, S. K. (1985). Synthetic design of policy decisions in system dynamics models: A modal control theoretical approach. System Dynamics Review, 1(1), 63–80.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morecroft, J. D. W. (2007). Strategic modeling and business dynamics: A feedback systems approach. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, J. S., Howick, S., & Belton, V. (2017). A toolkit of designs for mixing discrete event simulation and system dynamics. European Journal of Operational Research, 257(3), 907–918.10.1016/j.ejor.2016.08.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munro, I., & Mingers, J. (2002). The use of multimethodology in practice – Results of a survey of practitioners. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(4), 369–378.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olaya, Y., & Dyner, I. (2005). Modeling for policy assessment in the natural gas industry. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(10), 1122–1131.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paez-Perez, D., & Sanchez-Silva, M. (2016). A dynamic principal-agent framework for modeling the performance of infrastructure. European Journal of Operational Research, 254(2), 576–594.10.1016/j.ejor.2016.03.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasaoglu, G., Harrison, G., Jones, L., Hill, A., Beaudet, A., & Thiel, C. (2016). A system dynamics based market agent model simulating future powertrain technology transition: Scenarios in the EU light duty vehicle road transport sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 133–146.10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollack, J. (2009). Multimethodology in series and parallel: Strategic planning using hard and soft OR. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(2), 156–167.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, J. H. (2014). System/scenario duality–A supporting equivalence. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 65(9), 1344–1360.10.1057/jors.2013.76
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pruyt, E., & Kwakkel, J. H. (2014). Radicalization under deep uncertainty: A multi-model exploration of activism, extremism, and terrorism. System Dynamics Review, 30(1–2), 1–28.10.1002/sdr.v30.1-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randers, J. (1980). Guidelines for model conceptualization. In Randers J. (Ed.), Elements of the system dynamics method (pp. 117–139). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, N. H., Andersen, D. F., Deal, R. M., Grant, M. S., & Shaffer, W. A. (1983). Introduction to computer simulation: The system dynamics modeling approach. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Ulloa, R. A., Montbrun, A., & Martínez-Vicente, S. (2011). Soft system dynamics methodology in action: A study of the problem of citizen insecurity in an Argentinean province. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 24(4), 275–323.10.1007/s11213-010-9187-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Ulloa, R. A., & Paucar-Caceres, A. (2005). Soft system dynamics methodology (SSDM): Combining soft systems methodology (SSM) and system dynamics (SD). Systemic Practice and Action Research, 18(3), 303–334.10.1007/s11213-005-4816-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romme, A. G. L. (2004). Unanimity rule and organizational decision making: A simulation model. Organization Science, 15(6), 704–718.10.1287/orsc.1040.0090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudolph, J. W., & Repenning, N. P. (2002). Disaster dynamics: Understanding the role of quantity in organizational collapse. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 1–30.10.2307/3094889
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sanatani, S. (1981). Market penetration of new products in segmented populations: A system dynamics simulation with fuzzy sets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 19(4), 313–329.10.1016/0040-1625(81)90004-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos, S. P., Belton, V., & Howick, S. (2008). Enhanced performance measurement using OR: A case study. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(6), 762–775.10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schieritz, N., & Milling, P. M. (2003). Modeling the forest or modeling the trees. In Proceedings of the 2003 International System Dynamics Conference. New York, NY: System Dynamics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, M. J., & Gary, M. S. (2002). Combining system dynamics and conjoint analysis for strategic decision making with an automotive high-tech SME. System Dynamics Review, 18(3), 359–379.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwaninger, M. (2004). Methodologies in conflict: Achieving synergies between system dynamics and organizational cybernetics. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 21(4), 411–431.10.1002/sres.649
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwaninger, M. (2006). System dynamics and the evolution of the systems movement. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 23(5), 583–594.10.1002/sres.800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seth, K. (1994). A fuzzy set theoretic approach to qualitative analysis of causal loops in system dynamics. European Journal of Operational Research, 78(3), 380–393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Setianto, N. A., Cameron, D., & Gaughan, J. B. (2014). Identifying archetypes of an enhanced system dynamics causal loop diagram in pursuit of strategies to improve smallholder beef farming in Java, Indonesia. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(5), 642–654.10.1002/sres.v31.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiegler, V. L., Naim, M. M., Towill, D. R., & Wikner, J. (2016). A technique to develop simplified and linearised models of complex dynamic supply chain systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 251(3), 888–903.10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Swinerd, C., & McNaught, K. R. (2012). Design classes for hybrid simulations involving agent-based and system dynamics models. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 25, 118–133.10.1016/j.simpat.2011.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinerd, C., & McNaught, K. R. (2014). Simulating the diffusion of technological innovation with an integrated hybrid agent-based system dynamics model. Journal of Simulation, 8(3), 231–240.10.1057/jos.2014.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinerd, C., & McNaught, K. R. (2015). Comparing a simulation model with various analytic models of the international diffusion of consumer technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 100, 330–343.10.1016/j.techfore.2015.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan, B., Anderson, E. G., Dyer, J. S., & Parker, G. G. (2010). Evaluating system dynamics models of risky projects using decision trees: Alternative energy projects as an illustrative example. System Dynamics Review, 26(1), 1–17.10.1002/sdr.433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Toro, M., & Aracil, J. (1988). Qualitative analysis of system dynamics ecological models. System Dynamics Review, 4(1–2), 56–80.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.10.1111/bjom.2003.14.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkateswaran, J., & Son, Y. J. (2005). Hybrid system dynamic-discrete event simulation-based architecture for hierarchical production planning. International Journal of Production Research, 43(20), 4397–4429.10.1080/00207540500142472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vennix, J., Akkermans, H. A., & Rouwette, E. A. (1996). Group model-building to facilitate organizational change: An exploratory study. System Dynamics Review, 12(1), 39–58.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viana, J., Brailsford, S. C., Harindra, V., & Harper, P. R. (2014). Combining discrete-event simulation and system dynamics in a healthcare setting: A composite model for Chlamydia infection. European Journal of Operational Research, 237(1), 196–206.10.1016/j.ejor.2014.02.052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walrave, B., Van Oorschot, K. E., & Romme, A. G. L. (2011). Getting trapped in the suppression of exploration: A simulation model. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1727–1751.10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01019.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., Lai, J.-Y., & Chang, C.-H. (2016). Modeling and analysis for mobile application services: The perspective of mobile network operators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 111, 146–163.10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolstenholme, E. (1990). System enquiry: A system dynamics approach. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, D. D., Kefan, X., Hua, L., Shi, Z., & Olson, D. L. (2010). Modeling technological innovation risks of an entrepreneurial team using system dynamics: An agent-based perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(6), 857–869.10.1016/j.techfore.2010.01.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yearworth, M., & White, L. (2013). The uses of qualitative data in multimethodology: Developing causal loop diagrams during the coding process. European Journal of Operational Research, 231(1), 151–161.10.1016/j.ejor.2013.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, R., Zhou, X., Han, J., & Liu, C. (2016). For the sustainable performance of the carbon reduction labeling policies under an evolutionary game simulation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 112, 262–274.10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zolfagharian, M., Akbari, R., & Fartookzadeh, H. (2014). Theory of knowledge in system dynamics models. Foundations of Science, 19(2), 189–207.10.1007/s10699-013-9328-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar