A Data Envelopment Analysis or Goal Programming Model with Fuzzy Preferences of Decision Makers
Due to the complexity and uncertainty involved in real world decision problems, the determination and interpretation of Decision Makers' preference relations remain a challenging task for them. This paper develops a novel procedure for incorporating preference information in the efficiency analysis of Decision Making Units. The efficiency of Decision Making Units is defined in the spirit of Data Envelopment Analysis, complemented with Decision Maker's preference information. Our procedure begins by aiding the different decision making group members to express their incomplete fuzzy preferences by using a multiple objective linear programming approach for generating a common set of weights in the DEA framework.
© 2021 The Author(s). This article is distributed under the terms of the license CC-BY 4.0., which permits any further distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Bannour, B. (2021). A Data Envelopment Analysis or Goal Programming Model with Fuzzy Preferences of Decision Makers, Journal of Applied Economic Science, Volume XVI, Winter, 4(74), 415 – 420. https://doi.org/10.57017/jaes.v16.4(74).04
[1] Banker, R.D. 1980. Studies in Cost Allocation and Efficiency Evaluation. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration. Also available from University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1981.
[2] Banker, R.D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W. 1984. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis, Management Science, 30(9): 1078-1092. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2631725
[3] Belton, V. and Stewart, T.J. 2002. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach, Kluwer Academic Publisher, 372 p. ISBN-13: 978-0792375050
[4] Ben-Tal, A. and Nemirovsky, A. 1999. Robust solutions to uncertain programs, Operation Research Letters, 25(1): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6377(99)00016-4
[5] Chen, Y., Kilgour, D.M. and Hipel, K.W. 2011. An extreme-distance approach to multiple criteria ranking, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 53(5-6): 646-658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.10.001
[6] Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. and Rhodes, E. 1978. Measuring the inefficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6): 429-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
[7] Emrouznejad, A., Parker, B.R. and Tavares, G. 2007. Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: A survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 42(3): 151-157. DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2007.07.002
[8] Foroughi, A.A. and Aouni, B. 2012. Ranking units in DEA based on efficiency intervals and decision-maker's preferences, International Transactions in Operational Research, 19: 567-579. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3995.2011.00834.x
[9] Pedraja-Chaparro, F., Salinas-Jimenez, J., and Smith, P. 1997. On the role of weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 8(2): 215–230. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41770537
[10] Roll, Y., Cook, D.W. and Golany, B. 1991. Controlling Factor Weights in Data Envelopment Analysis, IIE Transactions, 23(1): 2-9. DOI: 10.1080/07408179108963835
[11] Sinuany-Stern, Z., Friedman, L. 1998. DEA and the discriminant analysis of ratios for ranking units, European Journal of Operational Research, 111(3): 470–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00313-5
[12] Xu, Y., Da, Q. and Liu, L. 2009. Normalizing rank aggregation method for priority of a fuzzy preference relation and its effectiveness, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 50(8): 1287–1297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2009.06.008
[13] Xu, Z.S. 2004. Goal programming models for obtaining the priority vector of incomplete fuzzy preference relation, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 36: 261–270.
[14] Xu, Z.S. 2003. Two methods for ranking alternatives in group decision-making with different preference information, Information: An International Journal, 6: 389–394.