Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Integrierte Technikbewertung bei unvollständigen Informationen als Unterstützung für die Bestimmung von Besten Verfügbaren Techniken (BVT)

Integrated technique assessment with imprecise information as a support for the identification of best available techniques (BAT)

  • Chapter
Produktion und Umwelt

  • 308 Accesses

Abstract

The determination of Best Available Techniques (BAT) plays an essential role in the realisation of the IPPC-Directive 96/61/EC (concerning integrated pollution prevention and control) in all Member States of the European Union. From a methodological point of view, the BAT determination is based on a comprehensive cross-media assessment of the impacts on the environment in general and therefore forms a multi criteria decision situation. However, exact data for the description of the investigated techniques and their potential environmental impact are rarely obtainable. Therefore, a decision support tool for the identification of BAT should also take into account imprecise information. In this paper, the Outranking method PROMETHEE has been chosen as a multi criteria decision support. Enhancements towards the consideration of imprecise information are discussed, such as fuzzy intervals and incomplete data sets. The application of the conceived multi criteria decision support tool as well as a graphical sensitivity analysis is presented with the help of a case study from the iron and steel making industry.

Zusammenfassung

Die Identifikation von Besten Verfügbaren Techniken (BVT) spielt eine wesentliche Rolle bei der Umsetzung der IVU-Richtline (96/61/EG, EG-Richtlinie über die integrierte Vermeidung und Verminderung der Umweltverschmutzung) in allen Mitgliedsstaaten. Aus methodischer Sicht stellt die Bestimmung von BVT eine Mehrzielentscheidung dar, die auf einer umfassenden medienübergreifenden Bewertung beruht. Allerdings können nur selten exakte Daten für die Beschreibung sämtlicher untersuchter Techniken und deren potentiellen Umweltauswirkungen erhoben werden. Daher sollte eine Entscheidungsunterstützung auch die Auswertung unvollständiger Informationen erlauben. In diesem Beitrag werden das Outranking-Verfahren PROMETHEE und seine Erweiterungsmöglichkeiten für die Berücksichtigung ungenauer Informationen, wie etwa Fuzzy Intervalle und unvollständige Datensätze, diskutiert. Anhand einer Fallstudie aus der Eisen- und Stahlindustrie wird die Anwendung des multikriteriellen Entscheidungsunterstützungssystems und einer graphischen Sensitivitätsanalyse vorgestellt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Rashdan D, Al-Kloub B, Dean A, Al-Shemmeri, T (1999) Environmental impact assessment and ranking the environmental projects in Jordan. European Journal of Operational Research 118: 30–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bouyssou D (1990) Building criteria: a prerequisite for MCDA. In: Bana e Costa CA (ed) Readings in multiple criteria decision aid. Springer, Berlin Heielberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brans JP, Vincke Ph, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research 24: 228–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Carlsson C, Fullér R (1996) Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: Recent developments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78: 139–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen S-J, Hwang C-L, Hwang FP (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making, methods and applications. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 375. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. De Baets B, Markova-Stupnanova A ( 1997) Analytical expressions for the addition of fuzzy intervals. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 91: 203–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Delgado M, Vial MA, Voxman W (1998) A fuzziness measure for fuzzy numbers: Applications. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 94: 205–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems: theory and application. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. French S (1986) Decision theory — an introduction to the mathematics of rationality. Ellis Horwood, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  10. Geldermann J (1999) Entwicklung eines multikriteriellen Entscheidungsunterstützungssystems zur integrierten Technikbewertung. Fortschritt-Berichte VDI, Reihe 16 (Technik und Wirtschaft), Nr. 105. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf

    Google Scholar 

  11. Geldermann J, Spengler T, Rentz O (2000) Fuzzy outranking for environmental assessment-— case study: iron and steel making industry. Fuzzy Sets and Systems — Special Issue on Soft Decision Analysis 115: 45–65

    Google Scholar 

  12. Geldermann J, Spengler T, Rentz O (1999) Proposal for an integrated approach for the assessment of cross-media aspects relevant for the determination of ‘Best Available Techniques’ BAT in the European Union. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4(2): 94–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Greco S, Matarazzo B, Slowinsky R, Zanakis S ( 1999) Rough set analysis of data tables with missing values. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Decision Science Institute, Athens

    Google Scholar 

  14. Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Udo de Haes HA, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Ansems AMM, Eggels PG, Van Duin R, De Doede HP (1992) Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Guide & Backgrounds, Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  15. Huylenbroeck G van (1959) The conflict analysis method: bridging the gap between ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and ORESTE. European Journal of Operational Research 82:490–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Le Téno JF, Mareschal B (1998) An interval version of PROMETHEE for the comparison of building products’ design with ill-defined data on environmental quality. European Journal of Operational Research 109: 522–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mareschal B (1988) Weight stability intervals in multicriteria decision aid. European Journal of Operational Research 33: 54–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Munakata T ( 1998) Fundamentals of the new artificial intelligence — beyond traditional paradigms. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pawlak Z (1991) Rough sets: theoretical aspects of reasoning about data. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rentz O, Geldermann J, Jahn C, Spengler T (1998) Proposal for an integrated approach for the assessment of cross-media aspects relevant for the determination of’ Best Available Techniques’ BAT in the European Union — Project Report on behalf of the UBA (Berlin). Deutsch-Französisches Institut für Umweltforschung (DFIU), Karlsruhe

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rentz O, Spengler T, Geldermann J (1998) Entwicklung eines multikriteriellen Entscheidungsunterstützungssystems zur optimalen Allokation produktionsintegrierter Umweltschutzmańahmen, verifiziert für den Bereich der Eisen-und Stahlindustrie. Project report on behalf of the Volkswagen-Stiftung, University of Karlsruhe (TH)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ribeiro RA (1996) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: A review and new preference elicitation techniques. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78: 155–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rommelfanger, H (1994) Fuzzy Decision Support-Systeme — Entscheiden bei Unschärfe. 2. Aufl. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Rommelfanger H (1996) Fuzzy linear programming and applications. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 92: 512–527

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roy B, Bouyssou D (1993) Aide multicritère la décision. Economica, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  26. Saaty TL (1991) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 48: 9–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Spengler T, Geldermann J, Hähre S, Sieverdingbeck A, Rentz O (1998) Development of a multiple criteria based decision support system for LCA — case study: tinplate production. Journal of Cleaner Production 6: 37–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Stewart TJ (1992) A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and praxis. OMEGA — International Journal of Management Science 20. 569–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. UBA-Texts 19/96e 52/95 (1996) Life-cycle assessment for drinks packaging systems. Umweltbundesamt, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  30. Vincke P (1986) Analysis of multicriteria decision aid in Europe. European Journal of Operational Research 25: 160–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zadeh LA (1996) Decision analysis and fuzzy mathematics: a personal perspective. EFDAN’ 96, Dortmund

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zimmermann HJ (1987) Fuzzy sets, decision making, and expert systems. Kluwer, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Zimmermann HJ, Gutsche L (1991) Multi-Criteria Analyse. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. French-German Institute for Environmental Research (DFIU), University of Karlsruhe (TH), Hertzstraße 16, 76187, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Jutta Geldermann & Otto Rentz

Authors
  1. Jutta Geldermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Otto Rentz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jutta Geldermann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Produktionswirtschaft, Universität Bremen, Wilhelm-Herbst-Straße 12, 28359, Bremen

    Hans-Dietrich Haasis

  2. Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Produktionswirtschaft, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Katharinenstraße 3, 38106, Braunschweig

    Thomas Spengler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Geldermann, J., Rentz, O. (2001). Integrierte Technikbewertung bei unvollständigen Informationen als Unterstützung für die Bestimmung von Besten Verfügbaren Techniken (BVT). In: Haasis, HD., Spengler, T. (eds) Produktion und Umwelt. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17036-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17036-2_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-62083-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-17036-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation