Fuzzy SIWEC and Fuzzy RAWEC Methods for Sustainable Waste Disposal Technology Selection

Ali Katrancı; Nilsen Kundakcı; Kevser Arman

doi:10.31181/sor31202633

Authors

Ali Katrancı Pamukkale University, Social Sciences Institute, Major of Business Administration, Denizli, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7586-1169
Nilsen Kundakcı Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7283-320X
Kevser Arman Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4400-5976

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31181/sor31202633

Keywords:

Fuzzy MCDM, Fuzzy SIWEC, Fuzzy RAWEC, Sustainable waste management

Abstract

Rapid industrialization, population growth, and poor waste management have led to significant environmental and economic challenges. These issues underscore the need for effective disposal technologies to mitigate public health risks, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote resource recovery. This study aims to determine the most suitable sustainable solid waste disposal technology for the planned Çivril Solid Waste Disposal Facility in Denizli Province. To evaluate eight disposal alternatives—landfilling (A₁), composting (A₂), biomethanization (A₃), incineration (A₄), gasification (A₅), plasma treatment (A₆), pyrolysis (A₇), and refuse-derived fuel (RDF) (A₈)—we employed fuzzy-based Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods: the Simple Weight Calculation (SIWEC) and Ranking Alternatives with Weights of Criterion (RAWEC). Twelve criteria, including environmental impact, legal compliance, and operational costs, were weighted using Fuzzy SIWEC, while the alternatives were ranked using Fuzzy RAWEC. The results identified composting (A₂) as the most suitable technology, whereas RDF (A₈) performed the worst. Validation through comparison with other MCDM methods (F-TOPSIS, F-SAW, F-MABAC, and CORASO) demonstrated high consistency. Sensitivity analysis confirmed that composting (A₂) and gasification (A₅) maintained stable rankings across different scenarios, while the rankings of other methods varied depending on decision-maker preferences. The integrated use of fuzzy-based SIWEC and RAWEC provides a reliable and systematic framework for sustainable waste management decision-making.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala: Problems and prospects. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-450. https://doi.org/10.3828/idpr.29.4.2

Mmereki, D., Baldwin, A., & Li, B. (2016). A comparative analysis of solid waste management in developed, developing and lesser developed countries. Environmental Technology Reviews, 5(1), 120-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622515.2016.1259357

Saketa, Y., Tamene, N., & Melknew, M. (2023). Municipal solid waste disposal site suitability analysis using multi-criteria evaluation in Assosa, Ethiopia. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20(4), 3815-3830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04221-9

Arıkan, E., Şimşit-Kalender, Z. T., & Vayvay, Ö. (2017). Solid waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria decision making methods and an application in Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 403-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.054

Kharat, M. G., Murthy, S., Kamble, S. J., Raut, R. D., Kamble, S. S., & Kharat, M. G. (2019). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis for environmentally conscious solid waste treatment and disposal technology selection. Technology in Society, 57, 20-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.005

Wang, Z., Ren, J., Goodsite, M. E., & Xu, G. (2018). Waste-to-energy, municipal solid waste treatment, and best available technology: comprehensive evaluation by an interval-valued fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 887-899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.184

Khan, S., & Faisal, M. N. (2008). An analytic network process model for municipal solid waste disposal options. Waste Management, 28(9), 1500-1508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.06.015

Roussat, N., Dujet, C., & Méhu, J. (2009). Choosing a sustainable demolition waste management strategy using multicriteria decision analysis. Waste management, 29(1), 12-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.04.010

Ekmekçioğlu, M., Kaya, T., & Kahraman, C. (2010). Fuzzy multicriteria disposal method and site selection for municipal solid waste. Waste Management, 30(8-9), 1729-1736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.02.031

Pires, A., Chang, N. B., & Martinho, G. (2011). An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setúbal Peninsula, Portugal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 56(1), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.08.004

Şener, Ş., Sener, E., & Karagüzel, R. (2011). Solid waste disposal site selection with GIS and AHP methodology: A case study in Senirkent–Uluborlu (Isparta) Basin, Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 173, 533-554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1403-x

Koroneos, C. J., & Nanaki, E. A. (2012). Integrated solid waste management and energy production-a life cycle assessment approach: the case study of the city of Thessaloniki. Journal of Cleaner Production, 27, 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.010

Liu, H. C., You, J. X., Lu, C., & Chen, Y. Z. (2015). Evaluating health-care waste treatment technologies using a hybrid multi-criteria decision making model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 932-942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.061

Vučijak, B., Kurtagić, S. M., & Silajdžić, I. (2016). Multicriteria decision making in selecting best solid waste management scenario: A municipal case study from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Journal of Cleaner Production, 130, 166-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.030

Rahman, S. S., Azeem, A., & Ahammed, F. (2017). Selection of an appropriate waste-to-energy conversion technology for Dhaka City, Bangladesh. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 10(2), 99-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2016.1270368

Coban, A., Ertis, I. F., & Cavdaroglu, N. A. (2018). Municipal solid waste management via multi-criteria decision making methods: A case study in Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 180, 159-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.130

Randazzo, L., Cusumano, A., Oliveri, G., Di Stefano, P., Renda, P., Perricone, M., & Zarcone, G. (2018). Landfill site selection for municipal solid waste by using AHP method in GIS environment: Waste management decision-support in Sicily (Italy). Detritus, 2(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.31025/2611-4135/2018.13656

Narayanamoorthy, S., Annapoorani, V., Kang, D., Baleanu, D., Jeon, J., Kureethara, J. V., & Ramya, L. (2020). A novel assessment of bio-medical waste disposal methods using integrating weighting approach and hesitant fuzzy MOOSRA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 122587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122587

Torkayesh, A. E., Malmir, B., & Asadabadi, M. R. (2021). Sustainable waste disposal technology selection: The stratified best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Waste Management, 122, 100-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.040

Muhammad, L. J., Badi, I., Haruna, A. A., & Mohammed, I. A. (2021). Selecting the best municipal solid waste management techniques in Nigeria using multi criteria decision making techniques. Reports in Mechanical Engineering, 2(1), 180-189. https://doi.org/10.31181/rme2001021801b

Garcia-Garcia, G. (2022). Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making to optimise solid waste management. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 37, 100650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2022.100650

Puška, A., Nedeljković, M., Pamučar, D., Božanić, D., & Simić, V. (2024a). Application of the new simple weight calculation (SIWEC) method in the case study in the sales channels of agricultural products. MethodsX, 13, 102930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2024.102930

Puška, A., Nedeljković, M., Božanić, D., Štilić, A., & Muhsen, Y. R. (2024b). ‘‘Evaluation of agricultural drones based on the compromise ranking from alternative solutions (CORASO) methodology. Engineering Review, 44(4), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.30765/er.2653

Gökalp, Y., Eti, S., Yüksel, S., & Dinçer, H. (2025). Towards Sustainable Healthcare: A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Framework for Green Hospital Investments. Computer and Decision Making: An International Journal, 2, 419-424. https://doi.org/10.59543/comdem.v2i.10969

Cao, J., Spulbar, C., Eti, S., Horobet, A., Yüksel, S., & Dinçer, H. (2025). Innovative approaches to green digital twin technologies of sustainable smart cities using a novel hybrid decision-making system. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 10(1), 100651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2025.100651

Puška, A., Božanić, D., Štilić, A., Nedeljković, M., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2025). Application of Fuzzy-Rough Methodology to the Selection of Electric Tractors for Small Farms in Semberija. Journal of Fuzzy Extension and Applications.

Puška, A., Štilić, A., Pamučar, D., Božanić, D., Nedeljković, M. (2024c). Introducing a novel multi-criteria ranking of alternatives with weights of criterion (RAWEC) model. MethodsX, 12, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2024.102628

Trung, D. D., Truong, N. X., Duc, D. V., & Bao, N. C. (2024). Data normalization in RAWEC method: Limitations and remedies. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR240315020T

Demir, G., & Ulusoy, E. I. (2024). Wind power plant location selection with fuzzy logic and multi-criteria decision-making methods. Computer and Decision Making: An International Journal, 1, 211-234. https://doi.org/10.59543/comdem.v1i.10713

Puška, A., Nedeljković, M., Dudić, B., Štilić, A., & Mittelman, A. (2024d). Improving agricultural sustainability in Bosnia and Herzegovina through renewable energy integration. Economies, 12(8), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies12080195

Petrovic, N., Jovanovic, V., Markovic, S., Marinkovic, D., & Petrovic, M. (2024). Multicriteria sustainability assessment of transport modes: A European Union case study for 2020. Journal of Green Economy and Low-Carbon Development, 3(1), 36-44. https://doi.org/10.56578/jgelcd030104

Nedeljković, M., Puška, A., Pamučar, D., & Marinković, D. (2024). Selection of agricultural product sales channels using fuzzy double MEREC and fuzzy RAWEC method. Agriculture and Forestry, 70(3), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.17707/AgricultForest.70.3.03

Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X

Božanić, D., Pamučar, D., Milić, A., Marinković, D., & Komazec, N. (2022). Modification of the logarithm methodology of additive weights (LMAW) by a triangular fuzzy number and its application in multi-criteria decision making. Axioms, 11(3), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11030089

Demir, G., Chatterjee, P., & Pamučar, D. (2024). Sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making: A state-of-the-art research perspective using bibliometric analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 237, 121660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121660

Radovanović, M., Petrovski, A., Cirkin, E., Behlić, A., Jokić, Ž., Chemezov, D., ... & Jana, C. (2024). Application of the new hybrid model LMAW-G-EDAS multi-criteria decision-making when choosing an assault rifle for the needs of the army. Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, 4(1), 16-31. https://doi.org/10.31181/jdaic10021012024r