A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties
Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Opon, Joel [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2020transfer abstract |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Sulfur vacancy in SnS - Li, Langang ELSEVIER, 2022, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:83 ; year:2020 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV050382756 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV050382756 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230626030401.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 200625s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV050382756 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 670 |a 540 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 51.54 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 33.61 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 35.90 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Opon, Joel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020transfer abstract | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. | ||
| 520 | |a Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Henry, Michael |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Li, Langang ELSEVIER |t Sulfur vacancy in SnS |d 2022 |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV008727228 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:83 |g year:2020 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 51.54 |j Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 33.61 |j Festkörperphysik |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 35.90 |j Festkörperchemie |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 83 |j 2020 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
j o jo |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
oponjoelhenrymichael:2020----:mlirtranltclrmwrfrutiaiiyvlainnemt |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2020transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
51.54 33.61 35.90 |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica (DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl Opon, Joel verfasserin aut A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties 2020transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Henry, Michael oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Li, Langang ELSEVIER Sulfur vacancy in SnS 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008727228 volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 51.54 Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen VZ 33.61 Festkörperphysik VZ 35.90 Festkörperchemie VZ AR 83 2020 0 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica (DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl Opon, Joel verfasserin aut A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties 2020transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Henry, Michael oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Li, Langang ELSEVIER Sulfur vacancy in SnS 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008727228 volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 51.54 Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen VZ 33.61 Festkörperphysik VZ 35.90 Festkörperchemie VZ AR 83 2020 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica (DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl Opon, Joel verfasserin aut A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties 2020transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Henry, Michael oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Li, Langang ELSEVIER Sulfur vacancy in SnS 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008727228 volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 51.54 Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen VZ 33.61 Festkörperphysik VZ 35.90 Festkörperchemie VZ AR 83 2020 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica (DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl Opon, Joel verfasserin aut A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties 2020transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Henry, Michael oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Li, Langang ELSEVIER Sulfur vacancy in SnS 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008727228 volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 51.54 Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen VZ 33.61 Festkörperphysik VZ 35.90 Festkörperchemie VZ AR 83 2020 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica (DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl Opon, Joel verfasserin aut A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties 2020transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. Henry, Michael oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Li, Langang ELSEVIER Sulfur vacancy in SnS 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008727228 volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 51.54 Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen VZ 33.61 Festkörperphysik VZ 35.90 Festkörperchemie VZ AR 83 2020 0 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Sulfur vacancy in SnS Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Sulfur vacancy in SnS Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:83 year:2020 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen Festkörperphysik Festkörperchemie |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| dewey-raw |
670 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Sulfur vacancy in SnS |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Opon, Joel @@aut@@ Henry, Michael @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2020-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV008727228 |
| dewey-sort |
3670 |
| id |
ELV050382756 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV050382756</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626030401.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200625s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV050382756</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">670</subfield><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">51.54</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">33.61</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.90</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Opon, Joel</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henry, Michael</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Li, Langang ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Sulfur vacancy in SnS</subfield><subfield code="d">2022</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV008727228</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:83</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">51.54</subfield><subfield code="j">Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">33.61</subfield><subfield code="j">Festkörperphysik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.90</subfield><subfield code="j">Festkörperchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">83</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Opon, Joel |
| spellingShingle |
Opon, Joel ddc 670 bkl 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| authorStr |
Opon, Joel |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV008727228 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
670 - Manufacturing 540 - Chemistry & allied sciences |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| topic |
ddc 670 bkl 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 670 bkl 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 |
| topic_browse |
ddc 670 bkl 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
m h mh |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Sulfur vacancy in SnS |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV008727228 |
| dewey-tens |
670 - Manufacturing 540 - Chemistry |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Sulfur vacancy in SnS |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV008727228 |
| title |
A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV050382756 (ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0 |
| title_full |
A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| author_sort |
Opon, Joel |
| journal |
Sulfur vacancy in SnS |
| journalStr |
Sulfur vacancy in SnS |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology 500 - Science |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2020 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Opon, Joel |
| container_volume |
83 |
| class |
670 540 VZ 51.54 bkl 33.61 bkl 35.90 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Opon, Joel |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |
| dewey-full |
670 540 |
| title_sort |
a multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| title_auth |
A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| abstract |
Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. |
| abstractGer |
Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA |
| title_short |
A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Henry, Michael |
| author2Str |
Henry, Michael |
| ppnlink |
ELV008727228 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T17:22:49.899Z |
| _version_ |
1803851210319462400 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV050382756</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626030401.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200625s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001046.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV050382756</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0195-9255(19)30519-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">670</subfield><subfield code="a">540</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">51.54</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">33.61</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">35.90</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Opon, Joel</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A multicriteria analytical framework for sustainability evaluation under methodological uncertainties</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Multicriteria analysis is widely used to perform sustainability evaluation for purposes such as decision making or progress assessment following a chosen sustainable development concept. The stages of multicriteria analysis include indicator selection, data characterization, normalization, weighting, and aggregation. However, due to the various framings of sustainability, non-equivalent approaches could be adopted at each stage, introducing methodological uncertainty. Consequently, depending on the methods chosen, divergent and conflicting conclusions or decisions may result. This paper addresses the issue of methodological uncertainties in sustainability evaluation by analyzing how methodological uncertainties arise during multicriteria analysis, then proposing an analytical framework that employs uncertainty and sensitivity analyses to quantify and manage the effects of methodological uncertainties. The consideration of methodological uncertainties in the structure of multicriteria sustainability evaluation shifts the analysis from deterministic to probabilistic, which is advantageous to arrive at robust and homogenized sustainability conclusions or decisions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henry, Michael</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Li, Langang ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Sulfur vacancy in SnS</subfield><subfield code="d">2022</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV008727228</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:83</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106403</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">51.54</subfield><subfield code="j">Nichteisenmetalle und ihre Legierungen</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">33.61</subfield><subfield code="j">Festkörperphysik</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">35.90</subfield><subfield code="j">Festkörperchemie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">83</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.401 |