Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cumulative Belief Degrees Approach for Assessment of Sustainable Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Intelligence Systems in Environmental Management: Theory and Applications

Part of the book series: Intelligent Systems Reference Library ((ISRL,volume 113))

Abstract

Over the past decades, sustainable development has emerged as one of the most prominent issues at all levels of society, from the global to the local level. To achieve a better balance between the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development in all countries of the world, starting from underdeveloped countries to developed countries, the right implementation of the sustainable development principles has a strategic significance that shapes the future of the countries. In this respect, measurement of sustainable development performance of countries is necessary in order to apply right sustainable development strategies, track the process, investigate the interactions between sustainability aspects, etc. The main purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate a new approach for measuring sustainable development levels of the countries using a cumulative belief degree approach. The approach enables the use of an incomplete data that is one of the critical problems in measuring sustainability of countries. Twenty-seven indicators for measuring 20 themes are selected based on the recommendations of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and data availability. Finally, the proposed approach is applied to rank 138 countries according to their sustainable development performances based on the most recent data available.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
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

References

  • Acosta, L. A., Eugenio, E. A., Enano, N. H, Jr., et al. (2014). Sustainability trade-offs in bioenergy development in the Philippines: An application of conjoint analysis. Biomass and Bioenergy, 64, 20–41. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.03.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adamisin, P., Vavrek, R., & Pukala, R. (2015). Cluster analysis of central and Southeast Europe countries via selected indicators of sustainable development. In SGEM2015 Conference Proceedings (pp. 135–140).

    Google Scholar 

  • Agenda 21. (1992). United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blancard, S., & Hoarau, J.-F. (2013). A new sustainable human development indicator for small island developing states: A reappraisal from data envelopment analysis. Economic Modelling, 30, 623–635. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2012.10.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boggia, A., & Cortina, C. (2010). Measuring sustainable development using a multi-criteria model: A case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 91, 2301–2306. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolcárová, P., & Kološta, S. (2015). Assessment of sustainable development in the EU 27 using aggregated SD index. Ecological Indicators, 48, 699–705. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Country Sustainability Ranking | RobecoSAM. (2015) .http://www.robecosam.com/en/sustainability-insights/about-sustainability/country-sustainability-ranking/. Accessed May 4, 2016.

  • FAO. (2016). Food security indicators. http://www.fao.org/economic/ess/ess-fs/ess-fadata/en/#.Vyk0-nqvjB5. Accessed May 3, 2016.

  • Frini, A., & BenAmor, S. (2015). A TOPSIS multi-criteria multi-period approach for selecting projects in sustainable development context. In 2015 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM) (pp. 1–9).

    Google Scholar 

  • Golusin, M., & Ivanović, O. M. (2009). Definition, characteristics and state of the indicators of sustainable development in countries of Southeastern Europe. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 130, 67–74. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2008.11.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustavson, K. R., Lonergan, S. C., & Ruitenbeek, H. J. (1999). Selection and modeling of sustainable development indicators: A case study of the Fraser River Basin, British Columbia. Ecological Economics, 28, 117–132. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00032-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hao, W., Xiaoling, C., Ying, H., et al. (2006). Modeling indicator systems for evaluating environmental sustainable development based on factor analysis. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, 11, 997–1002. doi:10.1007/BF02830200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. M. (2000). Basic principles of sustainable development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, T. (2001). Health promotion and social capital. Galway: National University of Ireland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, A., Rosengarten, C., Schwartz, J. D., & Alexandre, N. (2016). 2016 Environmental performance index. New Haven, CT: Yale University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iddrisu, I., & Bhattacharyya, S. C. (2015). Sustainable energy development index: A multi-dimensional indicator for measuring sustainable energy development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 50, 513–530. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (2016). LABORSTA internet: Main statistics (annual)—Hours of work (E). http://laborsta.ilo.org/applv8/data/c4e.html. Accessed May 3, 2016.

  • Ivanovic, O. D. M., Golusin, M. T., Dodic, S. N., & Dodic, J. M. (2009). Perspectives of sustainable development in countries of Southeastern Europe. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 2079–2087. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabak, Ö., Cinar, D., & Hoge, G. Y. (2013). A cumulative belief degree approach for prioritization of energy sources: Case of Turkey. In F. Cavallaro (Ed.), Assessment and simulation tools for sustainable energy systems (pp. 129–151). London: Springer London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kabak, O., & Ruan, D. (2011a). A cumulative belief degree-based approach for missing values in nuclear safeguards evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 23, 1441–1454. doi:10.1109/TKDE.2010.60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabak, Ö., & Ruan, D. (2011b). A comparison study of fuzzy MADM methods in nuclear safeguards evaluation. Journal of Global Optimization, 51, 209–226. doi:10.1007/s10898-010-9601-1

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomas, J. (1998). Social capital and health: Implications for public health and epidemiology. Social Science and Medicine, 47, 1181–1188. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00190-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H., Club of Rome. (Eds.). (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Universe Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munda, G. (2005). “Measuring Sustainability”: A multi-criterion framework. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7, 117–134. doi:10.1007/s10668-003-4713-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nationen, V. (Ed.). (2015). Work for human development. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. D., & Tobin, J. (1973). Is growth obsolete? In NBER Chapters (pp. 509–564).

    Google Scholar 

  • Parris, T. M., & Kates, R. W. (2003). Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28, 559–586. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riabacke, M., Danielson, M., & Ekenberg, L. (2012). State-of-the-art prescriptive criteria weight elicitation. Advances in Decision Sciences, 2012, 1–24. doi:10.1155/2012/276584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475. doi:10.1038/461472a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, K., & Sala-i Martín, X. (Eds.). (2015). World economic forum’s global competitiveness report, 2015–2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soubbotina, T. P. (2004). Beyond economic growth: An introduction to sustainable development (2nd ed.). Washington: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNECE. (2014). United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Conference of European Statisticians Recommendations on Measuring Sustainable Development. New York: Geneva. http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/publications/2013/CES_SD_web.pdf

  • United Nations. (Ed.). (2007). Indicators of sustainable development: Guidelines and methodologies (3rd ed.). New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waas, T., Hugé, J., Verbruggen, A., & Wright, T. (2011). Sustainable development: A bird’s eye view. Sustainability, 3, 1637–1661. doi:10.3390/su3101637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. E. (1996). Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth. Gabriola Island, BC; Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2016). World development indicators 2016. http://data.worldbank.org. Accessed May 4, 2016.

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (Ed.). (1987). Our common future. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18, 183–190. doi:10.1109/21.87068

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Engineering Department, Istanbul Technical University, 34356, Maçka, Istanbul, Turkey

    Hazal Ünlüçay, Beyzanur Çayır Ervural, Bilal Ervural & Özgür Kabak

Authors
  1. Hazal Ünlüçay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beyzanur Çayır Ervural
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bilal Ervural
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Özgür Kabak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Özgür Kabak .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fac. Management, Dept of Industrial Engg, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Cengiz Kahraman

  2. Magt Facu, Department of Industrial Engd, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

    İrem Uçal Sari

Appendix: Sustainable Development Performance of Countries

Appendix: Sustainable Development Performance of Countries

Rank

Country

Aggregated score (AS)

s3 level (rank)

Rank

Country

Aggregated score (AS)

s3 level (rank)

1

Norway

2.754

0.619 (2)

70

South Africa

1.523

0.136 (83)

2

Sweden

2.702

0.65 (1)

71

Rwanda

1.520

0.126 (88)

3

Finland

2.642

0.607 (3)

72

Sri Lanka

1.514

0.118 (93)

4

Denmark

2.416

0.489 (4)

73

Italy

1.506

0.235 (33)

5

Panama

2.375

0.394 (12)

74

Bhutan

1.489

0.144 (74)

6

Iceland

2.225

0.404 (10)

75

Cabo Verde

1.475

0.182 (48)

7

Ireland

2.200

0.446 (6)

76

Bolivia

1.475

0.132 (85)

8

New Zealand

2.159

0.336 (15)

77

Ukraine

1.467

0.177 (52)

9

Switzerland

2.146

0.429 (8)

78

Colombia

1.456

0.148 (67)

10

United Kingdom

2.134

0.42 (9)

79

Namibia

1.453

0.098 (118)

11

Costa Rica

2.130

0.267 (24)

80

Bulgaria

1.427

0.121 (91)

12

Luxembourg

2.094

0.472 (5)

81

Dominican Republic

1.419

0.099 (117)

13

Austria

2.081

0.4 (11)

82

Zambia

1.419

0.056 (138)

14

Chile

2.064

0.263 (26)

83

Indonesia

1.416

0.159 (59)

15

Trinidad and Tobago

2.053

0.275 (23)

84

Iran, Islamic Rep.

1.415

0.144 (73)

16

Netherlands

2.043

0.433 (7)

85

Nepal

1.414

0.13 (87)

17

Estonia

2.004

0.304 (21)

86

Morocco

1.410

0.116 (96)

18

Malta

1.984

0.333 (16)

87

Cambodia

1.409

0.133 (84)

19

Australia

1.967

0.325 (18)

88

Peru

1.398

0.15 (64)

20

Mongolia

1.950

0.194 (43)

89

Bosnia and Herzegovina

1.397

0.103 (109)

21

Canada

1.950

0.264 (25)

90

Kuwait

1.392

0.17 (53)

22

Uruguay

1.938

0.241 (31)

91

Cameroon

1.381

0.146 (70)

23

Malaysia

1.937

0.243 (30)

92

Macedonia, FYR

1.378

0.102 (113)

24

Singapore

1.934

0.321 (19)

93

Uganda

1.372

0.1 (116)

25

Mauritius

1.932

0.166 (58)

94

Senegal

1.367

0.103 (111)

26

Oman

1.931

0.298 (22)

95

Algeria

1.366

0.19 (46)

27

United Arab Emirates

1.927

0.34 (14)

96

Vietnam

1.361

0.122 (90)

28

Belgium

1.894

0.329 (17)

97

Gabon

1.333

0.104 (107)

29

France

1.884

0.259 (27)

98

Malawi

1.331

0.138 (80)

30

Germany

1.868

0.356 (13)

99

Lebanon

1.330

0.149 (66)

31

Mexico

1.866

0.137 (82)

100

El Salvador

1.326

0.117 (94)

32

Israel

1.858

0.315 (20)

101

United States

1.308

0.182 (49)

33

Latvia

1.835

0.183 (47)

102

Tunisia

1.306

0.121 (92)

34

Nicaragua

1.825

0.191 (44)

103

Serbia

1.303

0.091 (123)

35

Kazakhstan

1.803

0.238 (32)

104

Liberia

1.301

0.104 (108)

36

Czech Republic

1.793

0.232 (34)

105

Paraguay

1.281

0.153 (62)

37

Philippines

1.768

0.124 (89)

106

Armenia

1.251

0.107 (103)

38

Guyana

1.768

0.117 (95)

107

India

1.248

0.06 (136)

39

Argentina

1.733

0.243 (29)

108

Georgia

1.246

0.107 (102)

40

Slovenia

1.716

0.205 (38)

109

Tanzania

1.240

0.076 (130)

41

Lithuania

1.712

0.166 (57)

110

Moldova

1.234

0.111 (101)

42

Korea, Rep.

1.694

0.217 (36)

111

Ethiopia

1.211

0.111 (100)

43

Jordan

1.678

0.168 (54)

112

Albania

1.196

0.057 (137)

44

Portugal

1.663

0.145 (71)

113

Gambia, The

1.195

0.114 (97)

45

Turkey

1.662

0.19 (45)

114

Myanmar

1.185

0.167 (56)

46

Russian Fed.

1.649

0.142 (77)

115

Pakistan

1.178

0.061 (135)

47

Honduras

1.641

0.196 (42)

116

Madagascar

1.172

0.09 (125)

48

Thailand

1.640

0.139 (79)

117

Burkina Faso

1.147

0.106 (104)

49

Japan

1.623

0.251 (28)

118

Azerbaijan

1.146

0.102 (112)

50

Slovak Republic

1.622

0.15 (65)

119

Benin

1.136

0.094 (119)

51

Spain

1.619

0.2 (40)

120

Kyrgyz Rep.

1.115

0.103 (110)

52

Montenegro

1.609

0.142 (76)

121

Bangladesh

1.096

0.102 (114)

53

Lao PDR

1.605

0.151 (63)

122

Yemen, Rep.

1.089

0.086 (127)

54

Saudi Arabia

1.602

0.168 (55)

123

Zimbabwe

1.086

0.101 (115)

55

Cyprus

1.596

0.229 (35)

124

Mali

1.075

0.106 (105)

56

Brazil

1.593

0.177 (51)

125

Mozambique

1.044

0.089 (126)

57

Jamaica

1.588

0.143 (75)

126

Lesotho

1.039

0.091 (124)

58

Venezuela, RB

1.577

0.156 (60)

127

Greece

1.018

0.113 (98)

59

Ecuador

1.576

0.137 (81)

128

Swaziland

1.007

0.093 (120)

60

Guatemala

1.573

0.208 (37)

129

Guinea

1.006

0.105 (106)

61

Suriname

1.571

0.132 (86)

130

Cote d’Ivoire

0.997

0.079 (128)

62

Ghana

1.562

0.146 (68)

131

Nigeria

0.946

0.091 (122)

63

Kenya

1.549

0.092 (121)

132

Egypt

0.921

0.063 (133)

64

Poland

1.542

0.2 (41)

133

Burundi

0.904

0.112 (99)

65

China

1.539

0.204 (39)

134

Sierra Leone

0.870

0.144 (72)

66

Hungary

1.537

0.155 (61)

135

Angola

0.796

0.077 (129)

67

Romania

1.536

0.182 (50)

136

Chad

0.772

0.068 (132)

68

Croatia

1.527

0.146 (69)

137

Haiti

0.756

0.07 (131)

69

Botswana

1.524

0.142 (78)

138

Mauritania

0.691

0.061 (134)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ünlüçay, H., Ervural, B.Ç., Ervural, B., Kabak, Ö. (2017). Cumulative Belief Degrees Approach for Assessment of Sustainable Development. In: Kahraman, C., Sari, İ. (eds) Intelligence Systems in Environmental Management: Theory and Applications. Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol 113. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42993-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42993-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42992-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42993-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation