Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Volume 2016, Article ID 3824350, 14 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3824350
Research Article

Grey Weighted Sum Model for Evaluating Business Environment in West Africa

School of Management, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China

Received 9 January 2016; Revised 17 April 2016; Accepted 4 May 2016

Academic Editor: Rafael Morales

Copyright © 2016 Moses Olabhele Esangbedo and Ada Che. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. M. Blowfield, “Business and development: making sense of business as a development agent,” Corporate Governance, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 414–426, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. K. Chelst and Y. B. Canbolat, Value-Added Decision Making for Managers, CRC Press, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
  3. D. R. Karanki, Uncertainty Management in Reliability Assessment, Lambert Academic Publishing, 2010.
  4. The World Bank, “About Doing Business: Measuring for impact,” 2014, http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/978-0-8213-9984-2_About_Doing_Business.
  5. G.-H. Tzeng and J.-J. Huang, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla, USA, 2011. View at MathSciNet
  6. E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, and S. Kildiene, “State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 165–179, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. D. Jato-Espino, E. Castillo-Lopez, J. Rodriguez-Hernandez, and J. C. Canteras-Jordana, “A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction,” Automation in Construction, vol. 45, pp. 151–162, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. T. L. Saaty, “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process,” International Journal of Services Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 83, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. T. L. Saaty, “Decision making—the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (AHP/ANP),” Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–35, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. J. Antucheviciene, A. Zakarevicius, and E. K. Zavadskas, “Measuring congruence of ranking results applying particular MCDM methods,” Informatica, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 319–338, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  11. E. K. Zavadskas and A. Kaklauskas, Systemic-Technical Assessment of Buildings, Technika, Vilnius, Lithuania, 1996.
  12. H. G. Shakouri, M. Nabaee, and S. Aliakbarisani, “A quantitative discussion on the assessment of power supply technologies: DEA (data envelopment analysis) and SAW (simple additive weighting) as complementary methods for the ‘Grammar’,” Energy, vol. 64, pp. 640–647, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. B. Roy, “Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples,” RAIRO—Recherche Opérationnelle, vol. 2, no. V1, pp. 57–75, 1968. View at Google Scholar
  14. L. A. D. Rangel, L. F. A. M. Gomes, and R. A. Moreira, “Decision theory with multiple criteria: an application of ELECTRE IV and TODIM to SEBRAE/RJ,” Pesquisa Operacional, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 577–590, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1981. View at MathSciNet
  16. G. Qian and X. Qian, “The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using intuitionistic fuzzy information,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing (WiCOM '08), pp. 1–5, Dalian, China, October 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. G. Shafer, A mathematical theory of evidence, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1976. View at MathSciNet
  18. C. Hamzaçebi and M. Pekkaya, “Determining of stock investments with grey relational analysis,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 9186–9195, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. Wallenius, J. S. Dyer, P. C. Fishburn, R. E. Steuer, S. Zionts, and K. Deb, “Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: recent accomplishments and what lies ahead,” Management Science, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 1336–1349, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. M. Behzadian, R. B. Kazemzadeh, A. Albadvi, and M. Aghdasi, “PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 200, no. 1, pp. 198–215, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. X. Xu, “The SIR method: a superiority and inferiority ranking method for multiple criteria decision making,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 131, no. 3, pp. 587–602, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  22. W. Edwards and F. H. Barron, “SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 306–325, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. F. H. Barron and B. E. Barrett, “The efficacy of SMARTER—simple multi-attribute rating technique extended to ranking,” Acta Psychologica, vol. 93, no. 1–3, pp. 23–36, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. J.-J. Wang, Y.-Y. Jing, C.-F. Zhang, and J.-H. Zhao, “Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2263–2278, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. L. A. Zadeh, “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—I,” Information Sciences, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 199–249, 1975. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  26. G.-D. Li, D. Yamaguchi, and M. Nagai, “A grey-based rough decision-making approach to supplier selection,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 36, no. 9-10, pp. 1032–1040, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. D. Wang, “Extension of TOPSIS method for R&D personnel selection problem with interval grey number,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Management and Service Science (MASS '09), pp. 1–4, Wuhan, China, September 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. C. Bai and J. Sarkis, “A grey-based DEMATEL model for evaluating business process management critical success factors,” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 146, no. 1, pp. 281–292, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. E. Kose, M. Kabak, and H. Aplak, “Grey theory based MCDM procedure for sniper selection problem,” Grey Systems: Theory and Application, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 35–45, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  30. H. Kuang, K. W. Hipel, and D. M. Kilgour, “Evaluation of source water protection strategies in Waterloo Region based on Grey Systems Theory and PROMETHEE II,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC '12), pp. 2775–2779, IEEE, Seoul, Republic of Korea, October 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. Y. Z. Mehrjerdi, “Strategic system selection with linguistic preferences and grey information using MCDM,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 18, pp. 323–337, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. H. K. Kang, D. G. Kim, H. W. Jeong, G. Y. Park, and H. Y. Youn, “A novel interval grey number and entropy-based solution for multiple-criteria group decision making problem,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence Computing and 9th International Conference on Autonomic Trusted Computing (UIC/ATC '12), pp. 349–356, September 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. Z.-J. Ma, N. Zhang, and Y. Dai, “Some induced correlated aggregating operators with interval grey uncertain linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2013, Article ID 160610, 11 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  34. N. Zhang, “Method for aggregating correlated interval grey linguistic variables and its application to decision making,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 189–202, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. F. Jin, P. Liu, and X. Zhang, “The multi-attribute group decision making method based on the interval grey linguistic variables weighted harmonic aggregation operators,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 409–430, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. M. O. Esangbedo and A. Che, “Evaluating business environment in Africa using grey number weights,” Journal of Grey System, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 26–47, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  37. A. Afshari, M. Mojahed, and R. M. Yusuff, “Simple additive weighting approach to personnel selection problem,” International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 511–515, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  38. A. Memariani, A. Amini, and A. Alinezhad, “Sensitivity analysis of simple additive weighting method (SAW): the results of change in the weight of one attribute on the final ranking of alternatives,” Journal of Industrial Engineering, vol. 4, pp. 13–18, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  39. M. N. Andalecio, “Multi-criteria decision models for management of tropical coastal fisheries. A review,” Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 557–580, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. S.-Y. Chou, Y.-H. Chang, and C.-Y. Shen, “A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 189, no. 1, pp. 132–145, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at Scopus
  41. K. R. MacCrimmon, Decisionmaking among Multiple-Attribute Alternatives: A Survey and Consolidated Approach, Advanced Research Projects Agency, 1968.
  42. E. Triantaphyllou and S. H. Mann, “An examination of the effectiveness of multi-dimensional decision-making methods: a decision-making paradox,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 303–312, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. L. Abdullah and C. R. Adawiyah, “Simple additive weighting methods of multi criteria decision making and applications: a decade review,” International Journal of Information Processing and Management, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 39, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  44. C.-H. Goh, Y.-C. A. Tung, and C.-H. Cheng, “A revised weighted sum decision model for robot selection,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 193–199, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. E. Triantaphyllou and C.-T. Lin, “Development and evaluation of five fuzzy multiattribute decision-making methods,” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 281–310, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. M. Modarres and S. Sadi-Nezhad, “Fuzzy simple additive weighting method by preference ratio,” Intelligent Automation—Soft Computing, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 235–244, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, J. Antucheviciene, and A. Zakarevicius, “Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment,” Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, vol. 122, no. 6, pp. 3–6, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. E. K. Zavadskas, J. Antucheviciene, S. H. Razavi Hajiagha, and S. S. Hashemi, “Extension of weighted aggregated sum product assessment with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (WASPAS-IVIF),” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 24, pp. 1013–1021, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, and J. Antuceviciene, “Selecting a contractor by using a novel method for multiple attribute analysis: weighted aggregated sum product assessment with grey values (WASPAS-G),” Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 141–150, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  50. D. Stanujkic and E. K. Zavadskas, “A modified weighted sum method based on the decision-maker’s preferred levels of performances,” Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 461–469, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  51. T.-Y. Chen, “An interactive signed distance approach for multiple criteria group decision-making based on simple additive weighting method with incomplete preference information defined by interval type-2 fuzzy sets,” International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 979–1012, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. Y.-J. Wang, “A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model based on simple additive weighting method and relative preference relation,” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 30, pp. 412–420, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. N. Zamri and L. Abdullah, “A linear assignment method of simple additive weighting system in linear programming approach under interval type-2 fuzzy set concepts for MCDM problem,” in Advanced Computer and Communication Engineering Technology, H. A. Sulaiman, M. A. Othman, M. F. I. Othman, Y. A. Rahim, and N. C. Pee, Eds., pp. 833–842, Springer International, Berlin, Germany, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  54. Y. Xu, W. Zhang, and H. Wang, “A conflict-eliminating approach for emergency group decision of unconventional incidents,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 92–104, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. J.-L. Deng, “Control problems of grey systems,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 288–294, 1982. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. M.-S. Yin, “Fifteen years of grey system theory research: a historical review and bibliometric analysis,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 2767–2775, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. P. Delcea Camelia and D. Camelia, “Grey systems theory in economics—a historical applications review,” Grey Systems: Theory and Application, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 263–276, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  58. J. Xu and M. Sasaki, “Technique of order preference by similarity for multiple attribute decision making based on grey members,” IEEJ Transactions on Electronics, Information and Systems, vol. 124, no. 10, pp. 1999–2005, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  59. G.-D. Li, D. Yamaguchi, and M. Nagai, “A grey-based decision-making approach to the supplier selection problem,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 46, no. 3-4, pp. 573–581, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. Z. Turskis and E. K. Zavadskas, “A novel method for multiple criteria analysis: grey additive ratio assessment (ARAS-G) method,” Informatica, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 597–610, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  61. L. Liu, J.-H. Chen, G.-M. Wang, and D.-Z. Lao, “Multi-attributed decision making for mining methods based on grey system and interval numbers,” Journal of Central South University, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1029–1033, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. S. M. Mousavi, B. Vahdani, R. Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, and N. Tajik, “Soft computing based on a fuzzy grey group compromise solution approach with an application to the selection problem of material handling equipment,” International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 547–569, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. B. Oztaysi, “A decision model for information technology selection using AHP integrated TOPSIS-Grey: the case of content management systems,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 70, pp. 44–54, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. E. K. Zavadskas, T. Vilutiene, Z. Turskis, and J. Tamosaitiene, “Contractor selection for construction works by applying saw-g and topsis grey techniques,” Journal of Business Economics and Management, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 34–55, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. S. H. Zolfani, M. Sedaghat, and E. K. Zavadskas, “Performance evaluating of rural ICT centers (telecenters), applying fuzzy AHP, SAW-G and TOPSIS Grey, a case study in Iran,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 364–387, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. S. Datta, N. Sahu, and S. Mahapatra, “Robot selection based on greyMULTIMOORA approach,” Grey Systems: Theory and Application, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 201–232, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  67. Q. Li and N. Zhao, “Stochastic interval-grey number VIKOR method based on prospect theory,” Grey Systems: Theory and Application, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 105–116, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  68. S. Liu and Y. Lin, Grey Information: Theory and Practical Applications, Springer, 2005.
  69. S. Liu and Y. Lin, “Introduction to grey systems theory,” in Grey Systems, chapter 1, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  70. T. Aven and E. Zio, “Some considerations on the treatment of uncertainties in risk assessment for practical decision making,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 64–74, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. Y.-H. Lin, P.-C. Lee, and H.-I. Ting, “Dynamic multi-attribute decision making model with grey number evaluations,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 1638–1644, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. G. R. Pophali, A. B. Chelani, and R. S. Dhodapkar, “Optimal selection of full scale tannery effluent treatment alternative using integrated AHP and GRA approach,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 10889–10895, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. M. Kabak, S. Burmaoğlu, and Y. Kazançoğlu, “A fuzzy hybrid MCDM approach for professional selection,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 3516–3525, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. Y. Beikkhakhian, M. Javanmardi, M. Karbasian, and B. Khayambashi, “The application of ISM model in evaluating agile suppliers selection criteria and ranking suppliers using fuzzy TOPSIS-AHP methods,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 15-16, pp. 6224–6236, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. J. D. Fage, “Western Africa—region, Africa,” http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/640491/western-Africa.
  76. Doing Business, “Doing Business 2015 Going Beyond Efficiency,” 2014.
  77. Doing Business, “Historical Data Sets and Trends,” World Bank Group, http://www.doingbusiness.org/custom-query.
  78. K. J. Arrow, “A difficulty in the concept of social welfare,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 328–346, 1950. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  79. Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, “Oil Production,” http://www.nnpcgroup.com/nnpcbusiness/upstreamventures/oilproduction.aspx.