Hi Monica,

The outcomes from the CVORR project may be relevant to your research. As an alternative to LCA, it offers a new approach to sustainability assessment that integrates economic, technical, social and environmental values.

https://www.researchgate.net/project/CVORR-Complex-Value-Optimisation-for-Resource-Recovery-from-Waste

The paper "A pathway to a circular economy" provides an overview of the CVORR approach, and there are other papers that detail various steps of the approach and examples of applications.

https://www.researchgate.net/project/CVORR-Complex-Value-Optimisation-for-Resource-Recovery-from-Waste

Hope that helps! Kind regards,

Anne

hello there

You have two things: criteria and alternatives.

In topsis our criteria can have different weights and we can find our weights by several methods and one of them is ahp.

so you can find your weights of criteria by using ahp and then use topsis to rank your alternatives.

I made an excel file for topsis, but you should know your weights and kind of them first. hope to be useful.

Code software of topsis

Thank you for your answer Morteza Dehghan Bahabadi and for the file.

I would like to know if, in TOPSIS, one way to weight is the information is use the one that I have from my LCA and LCC method? I understood that AHP is to give different weight to the criteria no the value to the alternatives.

Thank you so much Anne Velenturf . I will follow the project.

You're welcome

You can use entropy method to find your weights by your information in initial matrix too. in addition, you can use only ahp to find your weights of criteria and to rank your alternatives as well

If you can, send me your data. I can help you better

Hi Monica, there is a lot of MCDM.

TOPSIS find an ideal solution from the data base you use.

I want to know why do you want to weigth the criteria you have?

Dear Monica. The point on subjectiveness is not a real point. The LCA (and LCC) are methods to quantify quantifiable criteria. I guess there are a also qualitative criteria in your problem. MCDM are meant to deal with subjectiveness when criteria are in conflict. There is no any methods to decide if a criteria is more o less important than another. This is a typical subjective decision that everybody (and every decision maker) have to take every day (e.g when I buy a car is more important safety? aesthetics? environment?...). The advantage of MCDM is the mathematical formalization of this subjectiveness in a transparent way (i.e. that can be explained to stakeholders). Of course there are many MCDM much more powerfull than AHP (see for example http://www.seehydropower.eu/download_deliverables/details.php?id=17)

Dear Monica,

You need to define the approach you want to adopt and based on the results of LCA + LCC (Quantitative), you have different options:

- moniterize in environmental impacts: you then convert your model into a single criterion

- approach a priori: you set the weighting of each criterion and you get a solution

- a pposteriori approach: you try all the weighting combinations, then you can get all the results between the criteria.

With all these approaches, you can use an optimization model to get the "best" solution (s).

@P. Girardi thank you so much for your answer and the file.

@Achille-B thank you for your answer. I was confuse if I have to work all with the same unit air just each criteria can manage their own units.

Thanks you.

@pabloandrespinto the reason why I want to weight my criteria is that I want to consider different groups in my research and what is important for them.