Location Selection of Surabaya Landfill using Integration of the PROMETHEE and the AHP Methods

Nova Indah Saragih; Peri Turnip

doi:10.30656/intech.v12i1.11961

Authors

Nova Indah Saragih Telkom University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3361-0844
Peri Turnip Universitas Wanita Internasional

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30656/intech.v12i1.11961

Keywords:

AHP, Integration Method, Location Selection of Landfill , MCDM, PROMETHEE

Abstract

Surabaya is the second-largest city in Indonesia. Like other major cities, Surabaya faces waste problems. The amount of waste produced by Surabaya residents has increased annually. This is partly due to the growing population. Currently, municipal waste management is still centralized in the Benowo Landfill. Owing to the increasing amount of waste and limited land available at the Benowo Landfill, a new landfill is needed. The selection of a landfill site is a complex problem because the selection criteria are multiple and conflicting with one another. The method used in this study is an integration of the PROMETHEE and AHP methods. The two MCDM methods were used to complement each other, and the weaknesses of one method were corrected by utilizing the strengths of the other, resulting in a better solution. This study aims to determine the location of a new landfill in Surabaya using the integration of the PROMETHEE and AHP methods. Based on the data processing that has been done, it is known that the new landfill location is in the Rungkut District.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ajin, M. L., Moses, J., Priya Dharshini -, M., Ece Sayn, F., Topalolu, G., Ozbay, B., -, al, Manoj, V., Swathi, A., & Tejeswara Rao -, V. (2021). The application of AHP-PROMETHEE II for supplier selection. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1988(1), 012062. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1988/1/012062

Brans, J.-P., & Mareschal, B. (2005). Promethee Methods. International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, 78, 163–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23081-5_5

Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2), 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5

Briggs, T., Kunsch, P. L., & Mareschal, B. (1990). Nuclear waste management: An application of the multicriteria PROMETHEE methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 44(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90308-X

Komchornrit, K. (2021). Financial Evaluation by the Combined AHP-PROMETHEE Method: A Case Study of Integrated Logistics Service Providers in Thailand. Journal of Community Development Research (Humanities and Social Sciences), 14(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.14456/JCDR-HS.2021.17

Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K., & Verbeke, A. (2004). PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis.: Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00153-X

Mahmoodzadeh, S., Shahrabi, J., Pariazar, M., & Zaeri, M. S. (2007). Project selection by using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS technique. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 30(1), 333-338. https://publications.waset.org/128/project-selection-by-using-fuzzy-ahp-and-topsis-technique

Önüt, S., & Soner, S. (2008). Transshipment site selection using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches under fuzzy environment. Waste Management, 28(9), 1552–1559. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WASMAN.2007.05.019

Perda Kota Surabaya No. 3 Tahun 2025. (2025). Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Kota Surabaya Tahun 2025-2045. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/338974/perda-kota-surabaya-no-3-tahun-2025

Pohekar, S. D., & Ramachandran, M. (2004). Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 8(4), 365–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2003.12.007

Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int. J. Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I

Sari, F., Kandemir, İ., Ceylan, D. A., & Gül, A. (2020). Using AHP and PROMETHEE multi-criteria decision making methods to define suitable apiary locations. Journal of Apicultural Research, 59(4), 546–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2020.1718341

Siagian, A., & Gwynne, R. (2023). An Integrated Model for Selecting and Evaluating Logistics Outsourcing Decisions using AHP and PROMETHEE II. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Education, 1(1), 30–45. https://jiee.bksti.org/index.php/iee/article/view/11

Sikalo, M., Arnaut-Berilo, A., & Delalic, A. (2023). A Combined AHP-PROMETHEE Approach for Portfolio Performance Comparison. International Journal of Financial Studies 2023, Vol. 11, Page 46, 11(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJFS11010046

Tasić, S., Vukićević, J., Dimitrijević, D., & Anđelković, D. (2024). Application of AHP and Promethee Methods for Ranking The Profitability of Investment Projects. Science International Journal, 3(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.35120/SCIENCEJ0301025T

Vego, G., Kučar-Dragičević, S., & Koprivanac, N. (2008). Application of multi-criteria decision-making on strategic municipal solid waste management in Dalmatia, Croatia. Waste Management, 28(11), 2192–2201. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WASMAN.2007.10.002

Wardana, R. W., Garside, A. K., & Anggara, A. T. (2022). Integrated analytic hierarchy process and preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation II for supplier selection. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2453(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0094738/2824912

Zhang, C., Kwon, S., Oh, J., & Park, K. (2023). An integrated AHP-PROMETHEE II ranking method to evaluate the resilience of sewer networks considering urban flood and ground collapse risks. Water Science and Technology, 87(6), 1438–1453. https://doi.org/10.2166/WST.2023.067