Constructing the FEEM sustainability index: A Choquet integral application

Abstract

This paper presents the development of the FEEM Sustainability Index (FEEM SI), a composite index including 19 different indicators grouped in the three classical pillars of sustainability -economic, social and environmental. We present the relevance of multi-attribute aggregation methodologies when dealing with such complex concepts and apply an aggregation methodology used for this case study: the Choquet integral operator. First, we normalize each sustainability indicator with the use of a benchmarking procedure with a smooth target of sustainability. We then develop an aggregation tree of sustainability criteria and a questionnaire to measure the values that experts attribute to individual sustainability criteria and their interaction. This survey suggests that a majority of experts consider sustainability criteria as complementary to each other. After combining the preferences of different experts to establish a consensus, we construct the FEEM SI using the Choquet integral aggregation procedure. The results for sustainability levels show that countries that are ranked at higher (lower) positions are those that have better (worse) outcomes in at least in two final pillars, respectively. Finally, we conduct a robustness analysis by repeating the aggregation procedure with different convex combinations of experts' preferences. The results indicate that, while sustainability levels of countries do vary with the expert preferences, countries' respective rankings remain mainly the same, irrespective of the combination of experts' preferences.

Air and water pollution over time and industries with stochastic dominance

“…There are various indicators and assessment methodologies for evaluating in practice the performance of industries, cities and countries, at global, national and regional level, related to economic and environmental sustainability (see e.g. Singh et al 2012, providing a recent overview of a great number of indicators that are already common practice for policy-making; Blanchet and Fleurbaey 2013, which favor a dimension by dimension dashboard approach; Xepapadeas and Vouvaki 2008;Agliardi 2011;Pinar et al 2014;Agliardi et al 2015, for detailed discussions of environmental sustainability). In this paper we propose a novel methodology which allows us to assess temporal trends and industry contributions to air and water pollution and to identify the cases where externalities affect the overall pollution.…”

Proposal of a Sustainability Index for the Automotive Industry

“…Critics argue that the concept cannot be "properly defined" [3]. According to Pinar et al [4] sustainability is an elusive concept being very rare to find two identical descriptions of its different components. Sustainable development is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present but also for future generations.…”

Social sustainability in the supply chain: Construct development and measurement validation

“…Understanding the three distinct dimensions namely economic, environment and social, and their inter-relationships is crucial (Elkington, 1999;Pagell and Wu, 2009;Gallengo et al, 2015). However, the social dimension has received little attention in the literature (Ashby et al, 2012;Seuring and Muller, 2008;Ahi and Searcy, 2015a), whereas the majority of studies refer to developed countries Jennings, 2002, 2004;Gunasekaran and Spalanzani, 2012;Pinar et al, 2014). In developing countries and emerging economies, apart from few studies (Zhu et al, 2005;Delai and Takahashi, 2013;Chand et al, 2015;Silvestre, 2015a;2015b;Gurtu et al, 2015), research on supply chain social sustainability (SCSS) is scarce.…”