A robust evaluation of sustainability initiatives with analytic network process (ANP)





Analytic network process, Evaluation, Manufacturing, Robustness, Sustainability


This paper presents a methodology on evaluating sustainable manufacturing initiatives using analytic network process (ANP) as its base.The evaluation method is anchored on the comprehensive sustainable manufacturing framework proposed recently in literature. A numerical example that involves an evaluation of five sustainable manufacturing initiatives is shown in this work. Results show that sustainable manufacturing implies enhancing customer and community well-being by means of addressing environmental issues related to pollution due to toxic substances, greenhouse gas emissions and air emissions. To test the robustness of the results, two approaches are introduced in this work: (1) using Monte Carlo simulation and (2) introducing structural changes on the evaluation model. It suggests that the results are robust to random variations and to marginal changes of the network structure. The contribution of this work lies on presenting a sustainable manufacturing evaluation approach that addresses complexity and robustness in decision-making. 


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Lanndon Ocampo, University of San Carlos

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Christine Omela Ocampo, University of San Carlos

Department of Industrial Engineering


Chatzimouratidis, A. I., Pilavachi, P. A. (2009). Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy, 37(3): 778-787. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.009

Chen, C. C., Shih, H. S., Shyur, H. J., Wu, K. S. (2012). A business strategy selection of green supply chain management via an analytic network process. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 64(8): 2544-2557. doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2012.06.013

Chiacchio, M. S. (2011). Early impact assessment for sustainable development of enabling technologies. Total Quality Management and Excellence, 39(3): 1-6.

de Brucker, K., Macharis, C., Verbeke, A. (2013). Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: a stakeholder management approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 224(1): 122-131. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2012.02.021

Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone.

Garbie, I. H. (2011). Framework of manufacturing enterprises sustainability incorporating globalization issues. In: Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering, Los Angeles, CA.

Harrison, J., Bosse, D., Philips, R. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1): 58-74. doi:10.1002/smj.801

International Trade Administration. (2007). How Does Commerce Define Sustainable Manufacturing? U.S. Department of Commerce. Available: http://www.trade.gov/competitiveness/sustainablemanufacturing/how_doc_defines_SM.asp.

Jayal, A. D., Baburdeen, F., Dillon, O. W. Jr., Jawahir, I. S. (2010). Sustainable manufacturing: modelling and optimization challenges at the product, process and system levels. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 2(3): 144-152. doi:10.1016/j.cirpj.2010.03.006

Joung, C. B., Carrell, J., Sarkar, P., Feng, S. C. (2013). Categorization of indicators for sustainable manufacturing. Ecological Indicators, 24: 148-157. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.05.030

Kassinis, G., Vafeas, N. (2006). Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1): 145-159. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.20785799

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A. C., van Erck, R. P. G. (2005). Assessing the sustainability performances of industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(4): 373-385. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.10.007

Mayer, A.L. (2008). Strengths and weaknesses of common sustainability indices for multidimensional systems. Environment International, 34(2): 277-291. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2007.09.004

Ocampo, L. A. (2015). A hierarchical framework for index computation in sustainable manufacturing. Advances in Production Engineering & Management, 10(1): 40-50. doi:10.14743/apem2015.1.191

Ocampo, L. A., Clark, E. E. (2014a). Developing a framework for sustainable manufacturing strategies selection. DLSU Business & Economics Review, 23(2): 115-131.

Ocampo, L. A., Clark, E. E. (2014b). A comprehensive evaluation of sustainable manufacturing programs using analytic network process (ANP). Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 9: 101-122.

Ocampo, L. A., Clark, E. E. (2015). An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach in the selection of sustainable manufacturing initiatives: a case of a semiconductor manufacturing firm in the Philippines. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 7(1): 32-49. doi:10.13033/ijahp.v7i1.223

Paloviita, A., Luoma-aho, V. (2010). Recognizing definitive stakeholders in corporate environmental management. Management Research Review, 33(4): 306-316. doi:10.1108/01409171011030435

Pham, D. T., Thomas, A. J. (2012). Fit manufacturing: a framework for sustainability. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(1): 103-123. doi:10.1108/17410381211196311

Promentilla, M. A. B., Furuichi, T., Ishii, K., Tanikawa, N. (2006). Evaluation of remedial countermeasures using the analytic network process. Waste Management, 26(12): 1410-1421. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2005.11.020

Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Saaty, T. L. (2001). Decision making with dependence and feedback: The Analytic Network Process (2nd ed.) Pittsburg: RWS Publications.

Sirikrai, S. B., Tang, J. C. S. (2006). Industrial competitiveness analysis: using the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 17(1): 71-83. doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2006.05.005




How to Cite

Ocampo, L., & Ocampo, C. O. (2015). A robust evaluation of sustainability initiatives with analytic network process (ANP). International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 3(2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2015.3595