AHP-Entropy based priority assessment of factors to reduce aviation fuel consumption

  • Jagroop SinghEmail author
  • Somesh Kumar Sharma
  • Rajnish Srivastava
Original Article


With the projected air traffic growth, aviation fuel needs will grow by 3% globally per year. Considering this, aviation industry has set ambitious goals to enhance its fuel efficiency. This study presents an integrated framework for aviation fuel consumption reduction, which will also limit its CO2 emissions. Further, this research aims to categorize influential factors and examine their relative importance for fuel-efficient aviation. This study’s theoretical framework combines and reconciles eight major areas: alternative jet fuels, aviation infrastructure, aircraft operations, socio-ecopolitical environment, aircraft design, technology, environmental uncertainty, and strategic changes. In all, 37 sub-factors were identified. The priority ratings of these sub-factors with respect to ‘aviation fuel consumption reduction’ objective is measured by hybrid analytical hierarchy process-entropy method, using pair-wise comparison matrices. The findings attributed the highest importance to ‘technological innovations’, followed by ‘aircraft design’ and ‘aircraft operations’ for saving aviation fuel. Based on the obtained ranking ‘engine design’, ‘laminar flow technology’, and ‘air traffic management technology’ emerged as the three most important sub-factors. The robustness of priority rankings has been tested using sensitivity analysis. This study shows the path for continuous improvement in aviation fuel efficiency by directing efforts and investments on highly important factors.


Aviation Air transport Fuel consumption AHP-Entropy 


Supplementary material

13198_2019_758_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (274 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 274 kb)
13198_2019_758_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (88 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 87 kb)
13198_2019_758_MOESM3_ESM.docx (99 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 98 kb)


  1. ACRP (2013) Apron planning administration and design guidebook. Transportation Research Board, 96.
  2. Agarwal R (2009) Sustainable (green) aviation: challenges and opportunities. SAE Int J Aerosp 2(1):1–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Aomar R (2010) A combined ahp-entropy method for deriving subjective and objective criteria weights. Int J Ind Eng: Theory Appl Pract 17(1):12–24Google Scholar
  4. Arushi, Drews S (2011) Aviation and environment. Working paper (Online). Centre for science and environment. Available at: (Accessed 15 Feb 2018)
  5. ATAG (2011). Beginner’s guide to aviation biofuels. (online) Air transport action group. Retrieved from: (Accessed 15 Feb 2018)
  6. ATAG (2013) Revolutionising air traffic management. Air Transport Action Group, Switzerland. Retrieved from (Accessed 11 Aug 2018)
  7. Bai L, Wang H, Huang N, Du Q, Huang Y (2018) An environmental management maturity model of construction programs using the AHP-entropy approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(7):1317. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balicki W, Glowacki P, Szczecinski S, Chachurski R, Szczecinski J (2014) Effect of the atmosphere on the performances of aviation turbine engines. Acta Mech Autom 8(2):70–73. Google Scholar
  9. Blakey S, Rye L, Wilson C (2011) Aviation gas turbine alternative fuels: a review. Proc Combust Inst 33(2):2863–2885. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boeing (2017) Current market outlook 2017–2036. Market analysis, Boeing commercial airplanes, Seattle. (Accessed 05 Mar 2018)
  11. Brueckner J, Abreu C (2017) Airline fuel usage and carbon emissions: determining factors. J Air Transp Manag 62:10–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cansino J, Román R (2017) Energy efficiency improvements in air traffic: the case of airbus A320 in Spain. Energy Policy 101:109–122. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chai J, Yang Y, Lai KK, Lu Q, Xing L, Liang T, Wang S (2017) Green transportation and energy consumption in China. Routledge, AbingdonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chamness K, Ohsfeldt M, Berkeley E (2010) ASPIRE—reducing emissions by promoting best practices in the Asia pacific region. J Aviat Manag 7(1):41–47Google Scholar
  15. Chuang PT (2001) Deployment for a location decision from a requirement perspective. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 18(11):842–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chuansheng X, Dapeng D, Shengping H, Xin X, Yingjie C (2012) Safety evaluation of smart grid based on AHP-entropy method. Syst Eng Procedia 4:203–209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cleave D (2009). Green air space design: reducing fuel burn. The MITRE Corporation. Retrieved from (Accessed 7 Feb 2018)
  18. Crowe TJ, Noble SJ, Machimada SJ (1998) Multi-attribute analysis of ISO 9001 registration using AHP. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 15(2):205–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Poret M, O’Connell J, Warnock-Smith D (2015) The economic viability of long-haul low cost operations: evidence from the transatlantic market. J Air Transp Manag 42:272–281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Delgado L, Prats X (2014) Operating cost-based cruise speed reduction for ground delay programs: effect of scope length. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 48:437–452. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dijkstra T (2013) On the extraction of weights from pairwise comparison matrices. CEJOR 21(1):103–123. MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Drake J (1974) Social, political and economic constraints on airline fuel optimization. Transp Res 8(4–5):443–449. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Drake P (1998) Using the analytic hierarchy process in engineering education. Int J Eng 14(3):191–196Google Scholar
  24. Eshtaiwi M, Badi I, Abdulshahed A, Erkan T (2018) Determination of key performance indicators for measuring airport success: a case study in Libya. J Air Trans Manag 68:28–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans JE, Weber ME, Moser WR (2006) Integrating advanced weather forecast technologies into air traffic management decision support. Lincoln Lab J 16(1):81Google Scholar
  26. Gardi A, Sabatini R, Ramasamy S, Kistan T (2014) Real-time trajectory optimisation models for next generation air traffic management systems. AMM 629:327–332. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gogas M, Adamos G, Nathanail E (2017) Assessing the performance of intermodal city logistics terminals in Thessaloniki. Trans Res Procedia 24:17–24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gorenkov A, Seregin E, Klyuiko I, Domkin E (1980) Expansion of fuel resources and saving of fuel for aircraft gas turbine engines. Chem Technol Fuels Oils 16(11):712–715. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grote M, Williams I, Preston J (2014) Direct carbon dioxide emissions from civil aircraft. Atmos Environ 95:214–224. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hileman J, De la Rosa Blanco E, Bonnefoy P, Carter N (2013) The carbon dioxide challenge facing aviation. Prog Aerosp Sci 63:84–95. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hunter D, Martinussen M, Wiggins M, O’Hare D (2011) Situational and personal characteristics associated with adverse weather encounters by pilots. Accid Anal Prev 43(1):176–186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. IATA (2013). IATA Technology Roadmap (Online). International Air Transport Association. Retrieved from: (Accessed 18 Feb 2018)
  33. IATA (2018) (Online). Retrieved from: (Accessed 19 Feb 2018)
  34. Ivanco M, Hou G, Michaeli J (2017) Sensitivity analysis method to address user disparities in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Syst Appl 90:111–126. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jaeger W, Egelkraut T (2011) Biofuel Economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences. SSRN Electron J.
  36. Janic M (2016) Analyzing, modeling, and assessing the performances of land use by airports. Int J Sustain Trans 10(8):683–702. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kamaruzzaman S, Lou E, Wong P, Wood R, Che-Ani A (2018) Developing weighting system for refurbishment building assessment scheme in Malaysia through analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach. Energy Policy 112:280–290. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kamfiroozi MH, Naeini AB (2014) An ERP selection combination model under uncertainty: A Grey-BSC-AHP-Entropy model. Int J Res Ind Eng 3(3):13Google Scholar
  39. Khandelwal B, Karakurt A, Sekaran P, Sethi V, Singh R (2013) Hydrogen powered aircraft: the future of air transport. Prog Aerosp Sci 60:45–59. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Koetse M, Rietveld P (2009) The impact of climate change and weather on transport: an overview of empirical findings. Trans Res Part D Trans Environ 14(3):205–221. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kruger W, Klimmek T, Liepelt R, Schmidt H, Waitz S, Cumnuantip S (2014) Design and aeroelastic assessment of a forward-swept wing aircraft. CEAS Aeronaut J 5(4):419–433. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kulesa G (2003) Weather and aviation: How does weather affect the safety and operations of airports and aviation, and how does FAA work to manage weather-related effects? In the potential impacts of climate change on transportation. Retrieved from: (Accessed 6 Feb 2018)
  43. Lawrence P (2009) Meeting the challenge of aviation emissions: an aircraft industry perspective. Technol Anal Strategy Manag 21(1):79–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lee J (2010) Can we accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in aircraft systems? Energy Convers Manag 51(1):189–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lee J, Mo J (2011) Analysis of technological innovation and environmental performance improvement in aviation sector. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8(9):3777–3795. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lewis W, Fai Pun K, Lalla T (2006) Empirical investigation of the hard and soft criteria of TQM in ISO 9001 certified small and medium-sized enterprises. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 23(8):964–985. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Liebeck R (2004) Design of the blended wing body subsonic transport. J Aircr 41(1):10–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McManners P (2016) Developing policy integrating sustainability: a case study into aviation. Environ Sci Policy 57:86–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Meric O, Turan O (2016) Evaluation of aircraft descent profile. Energy Procedia 95:308–313. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morrell P, Lu C (2007) The environmental cost implication of hub–hub versus hub by-pass flight networks. Trans Res Part D Trans Environ 12(3):143–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Müller C, Kieckhäfer K, Spengler T (2018) The influence of emission thresholds and retrofit options on airline fleet planning: an optimization approach. Energy Policy 112:242–257. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nava-Gaxiola C, Barrado C (2016) Performance measures of the SESAR Southwest functional airspace block. J Air Trans Manag 50:21–29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nickol C (2012) Technologies and concepts for reducing the fuel burn of subsonic transport aircraft (online). NATO AVT-209 workshop on energy efficient technologies; 22–24 Oct. 2012. Lisbon, Portugal. Available at: 6006 (Accessed 15 Feb 2018)
  54. Nikoleris T, Gupta G, Kistler M (2011) Detailed estimation of fuel consumption and emissions during aircraft taxi operations at Dallas/Fort worth international airport. Trans Res Part D Trans Environ 16(4):302–308. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Park Y, O’Kelly M (2014) Fuel burn rates of commercial passenger aircraft: variations by seat configuration and stage distance. J Transp Geogr 41:137–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Parker R (2009) From blue skies to green skies: engine technology to reduce the climate-change impacts of aviation. Technol Anal Strategy Manag 21(1):61–78. MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rao K, Selladurai V, Saravanan R (2009) TRIZ tool for optimization of airport runway. IFIP Adv Inf Commun Technol. Google Scholar
  58. Reynolds T (2014) Air traffic management performance assessment using flight inefficiency metrics. Transp Policy 34:63–74. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Reynolds TG (2015) Green aircraft operations. Encycl Aerosp Eng 1–12Google Scholar
  60. Risse K, Stumpf E (2014) Conceptual aircraft design with hybrid laminar flow control. CEAS Aeronaut J 5(3):333–343. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Roy S, Pattnaik P, Mall R (2017) Quality assurance of academic websites using usability testing: an experimental study with AHP. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 8(1):1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ryerson M, Hansen M, Bonn J (2011). Fuel consumption and operational performance. In: 9th USA/Europe air traffic management research and development seminar (ATM2011), Berlin.
  63. Ryley T, Davison L, Bristow A, Pridmore A (2010) Public engagement on aviation taxes in the United Kingdom. Int J Sustain Trans 4(2):112–128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Saaty TL (1988) The analytic hierarchy process. Pergamon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Saaty TL (2000) Fundamental of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. RWS Publ, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  66. Sarkar A (2012) Evolving green aviation transport system: a hoilistic approah to sustainable green market development. AJCC 01(03):164–180. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schäfer A, Evans A, Reynolds T, Dray L (2015) Costs of mitigating CO2 emissions from passenger aircraft. Nat Clim Change 6(4):412–417. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schlumberger, Charles E (2012) Air transport and energy efficiency. Transport papers, World Bank Group; Washington DC. Available at: [Accessed 18 Feb. 2018]
  69. Sgouridis S, Bonnefoy P, Hansman R (2011) Air transportation in a carbon constrained world: long-term dynamics of policies and strategies for mitigating the carbon footprint of commercial aviation. Trans Res Part A Policy Pract 45(10):1077–1091. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Simanaviciene R, Ustinovichius L (2010) Sensitivity analysis for multiple criteria decision making methods: TOPSIS and SAW. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2(6):7743–7744. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Singh J, Sharma SK, Srivastava R (2018) Managing fuel efficiency in the aviation sector: challenges. Accomp Oppor FIIB Bus Rev 7(4):244–251. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Spirkovska L, Lodha S (2002) AWE: aviation weather data visualization environment. Comput Gr 26(1):169–191. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Staples M, Malina R, Suresh P, Hileman J, Barrett S (2018) Aviation CO2 emissions reductions from the use of alternative jet fuels. Energy Policy 114:342–354. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Talib F, Rahman Z, Qureshi M (2011) Prioritising the practices of total quality management: an analytic hierarchy process analysis for the service industries. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 22(12):1331–1351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Turgut E, Rosen M (2012) Relationship between fuel consumption and altitude for commercial aircraft during descent: preliminary assessment with a genetic algorithm. Aerosp Sci Technol 17(1):65–73. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vaaben B, Larsen J (2015) Mitigation of airspace congestion impact on airline networks. J Air Trans Manag 47:54–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Walsh M, Sellers W III, Mcginley C (1989) Riblet drag at flight conditions. J Aircr 26(6):570–575. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wang T (2014) The research of electronic banking risk evaluation based on comprehensive assessment AHP-Entropy. Int J u- e-Service, Sci Tech 7(6):413–422. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wu G, Duan K, Zuo J, Zhao X, Tang D (2017) Integrated sustainability assessment of public rental housing community based on a hybrid method of AHP-Entropy weight and cloud model. Sustainability 9(4):603. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Yadav V, Sharma M (2016) Multi-criterion supplier selection model using the analytic hierarchy process approach. J Modell Manag 11(1):326–354. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yilmaz N, Atmanli A (2017) Sustainable alternative fuels in aviation. Energy 140:1378–1386. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhao H, Zhang N, Guan Y (2018) Safety assessment model for dangerous goods transport by air carrier. Sustainability. Google Scholar
  83. Zhong HW (2000) AHP method on the weight of entropy and it’s application in ship investment decision making. J Shanghai Marit Univ 1:014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentNational Institute of TechnologyHamirpurIndia
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentMNITBhopalIndia

Personalised recommendations