Methodology for prioritization of sustainable rural development projects
Keywords:
sustainable development, rural areas, development project managment, TOPSIS, project prioritization, expert assessment method
Abstract
Purpose: tools and mechanisms for substantiating management decisions to determine the best projects for the development of spatial systems. Particular attention is paid to studying the possibilities of using multi-criteria decision-making methods in the system of managing rural development projects. Discussion: development of scientifically based methodological tools for mathematical support of decision-making to determine the priority of implementation of sustainable rural development projects. Research design: the main results were obtained using both general scientific research methods (monographic, analysis, synthesis, measurement, formalization, etc.) and specific scientific ones (mathematical modeling, standardization). The information base of the study was formed on the basis of publications devoted to solving management problems using multi-criteria decision-making methods, as well as guiding and regulatory documents of international organizations. Results: а methodology for prioritization of sustainable rural development projects, based on a modification of the TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) method and adapted to the specifics of project management of territorial development has been developed. The sequence of stages and corresponding calculation operations is substantiated, mathematical tools for their implementation are presented, recommendations for the effective use of the expert assessment method to take into account the significance of project criteria are formulated, a mechanism for ensuring comparability of assessment data for positive and negative criteria is considered. The methodology can be used for a comparative assessment of sustainable rural development projects and determining the priority of their investment.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
1. Дуканич Л.В., Кувшинова Е.А. Многокритериальная оценка предпринимательской активности регионов Дальневосточного федерального округа // Научные исследования экономического факультета, 2020, т. 12, вып. 3, с. 7–15.
2. Лобкова Е.В. Применение метода TOPSIS при решении задачи оценки устойчивости развития территорий // Экономические науки, 2019, no. 172, с. 47–51.
3. Малафеевский Т.А. Интеграция процессного подхода и методики TOPSIS для оценки благосостояния регионов России // Петербургский экономический журнал, 2022, no. 1–2, с. 6–16.
4. Мамедова М.Г., Джабpаилова З.Г. Инфоpмационные технологии в оpганизационных и социально-экономических системах // Информационные технологии, 2016, т. 22, no. 6, с. 467–480.
5. Нефедов А.С., Шакиров В.А. Многокритериальная оценка альтернатив на основе метода TOPSIS в условиях неопределенности предпочтений лица, принимающего решения // Информационные технологии. Проблемы и решения, 2019, no. 3 (8), с. 25–32.
6. Птускин А.С., Левнер Е., Жукова Ю.М. Многокритериальная модель определения наилучшей доступной технологии при нечетких исходных данных // Вестник МГТУ им. Н.Э. Баумана. Сер. Машиностроение, 2016, no. 6, с. 105-127.
7. Терентьев В.Б., Терентьева А.В. Модернизация метода идеальной точки // Вестник Московского авиационного института, 2017, т. 24, no. 4, с. 213–220.
8. Халицкая К. Выбор технологий с помощью метода TOPSIS // ФОРСАЙТ, 2020, т. 14, no. 1, с. 85–96.
9. Юрков А.В., Бабаева Ж.Р. ESG-рейтинги: непараметрические методы построения // Управленческое консультирование, 2024, no. 2, с. 92–107.
10. Baylan E.B. A Novel Project Risk Assessment Method Development via AHP-TOPSIS Hybrid Algorithm // Emerging Science Journal, 2020, vol. 4, no.5, pp. 390–410. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.28991/esj-2020-01239 (accessed: 22.04.2025).
11. Chakraborty S. TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis // Decision Analytics Journal, 2022, no. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2021.100021 (accessed: 02.04.2025).
12. Fahimi K., Jafari Shahrestani A., Zamaninejad A. R., Kaboli F. Proposing a Performance Assessment Model for the Tehran Municipality Using TOPSIS and AHP // Journal of applied research on industrial engineering, 2024, no. 11 (2), pp. 298-317. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22105/jarie.2024.407131.1554 (accessed: 02.04.2025).
13. Ferova I.S., Lobkova E.V., Tanenkova E.N., Kozlova S.A. Tools for assessing sustainable development of territories taking into account cluster effects // Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 2019, no. 12 (4), pp. 600–626. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/toolsfor-assessing-sustainable-developmentof-territories-taking-into-account-clustereffects (accessed: 21.04.2025).
14. Gaspars-Wieloch H. Scenario planning as a new application area for TOPSIS // Operations Research and Decisions, 2023, vol. 33, no.2, pp. 23–34. Available at: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27315335.pdf (accessed: 21.04.2025).
15. Husin S., Fachrurrazi F., Rizalihadi M., Mubarak M. Implementing Fuzzy TOPSIS on Project Risk Variable Ranking // Hindawi. Advances in Civil Engineering, vol. 2019, 10 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9283409 (accessed: 21.04.2025).
16. Hwang C.L., Yoon К. Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making // Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer-Verlag, 1981, pp. 58–191. Available at: https://eprints. n o t t i n g h a m . a c . u k / i d / e p r i n t / 7 1 8 2 0 (accessed: 21.12.2024).
17. Jabbarzadeh A. Application of the AHP and TOPSIS in project management // Journal of Project Management, 2018, no. 3, pp. 125-130. Available at: https://www.growingscience.com/jpm/Vol3/ jpm_2018_1.pdf (accessed: 28.12.2024).
18. Jaber H. et al. A Framework to Evaluate Project Complexity Using the Fuzzy TOPSIS Method // Sustainability, 2021, no. 13. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063020 (accessed: 28.12.2024).
19. Korkmaz M., Gurer D. Financial performance evaluation of forest village cooperatives: A multi-criteria TOPSIS approach // Cerne, 2018, no. 24, pp. 280–287. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329693301_Financial_performance_evaluation_of_forest_village_cooperatives_A_multicriteria_topsis_approach (accessed: 28.12.2024).
20. Lin Sh.-W., Lo H.-W., Gul M. An assessment model for national sustainable development based on the hybrid DEA and modified TOPSIS techniques // Complex & Intelligent Systems, 2023, no. 9, pp. 5449–5466. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01034-2 (accessed: 22.12.2024).
21. Madanchian M., Taherdoost Н. A comprehensive guide to the TOPSIS method for multi-criteria decision making // Sustainable Social Development, 2023, vol. 1, issue 1. Available at: https://papers. ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4626727 (accessed: 22.12.2024).
22. Marzouka M., Sabbah M. AHP-TOPSIS social sustainability approach for selecting supplier in construction supply chain // Cleaner Environmental Systems, 2021, no. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100034 (accessed: 20.12.2024).
23. Maydeu-Olivares A. On Thurstone’s Model for Paired Comparisons and Ranking Data // New Developments in Psychometrics, Springer, 2003, pp. 519–526. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236623596_On_Thurstone’s_Model_for_Paired_Comparisons_and_Ra n k i n g _ D a t a # fu l l Te x t F i l e C o n t e n t (accessed: 18.11.2024).
24. Mumcu A., Gök M. Application of fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for manager selection // Aralık, 2021, December, pp. 270-280. Available at: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1672363 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
25. Nascimento C.R. S.M.S., de Almeida-Filho A.T., Palha R.P. A TOPSIS-Based Decision Model to Establish Priorities for Sequencing the Design of Construction Projects in the Public Sector // Hindawi. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2023. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/1414294 (accessed: 10.11.2024).
26. Norouzi A., Namin H.G. A Hybrid Fuzzy TOPSIS – Best Worst Method for Risk Prioritization in Megaprojects // Civil Engineering Journal, 2019, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1257-1272. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.28991/cej-2019-03091330 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
27. Pangsri P. Application of the Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods for Project Selection // Universal Journal of Management, 2015, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 15–20. Available at: https://www.hrpub.org/download/20141201/UJM3-12102910.pdf (accessed: 18.11.2024).
28. Parida P.K., Sahoo S.K. Multiple Attributes Decision Making Approach by TOPSIS Technique // International Journal of Engineering Research &Technology, 2013, vol.2, issue 11, pp. 907–912. Available at:https://www.ijert.org/research/multiple-attributes-decisionmaking-approach-by-topsis-technique-IJERTV2IS110272.pdf (accessed: 20.11.2024)
29. Piwowarski M. et al. TOPSIS and VIKOR methods in study of sustainable development in the EU countries // Procedia Computer Science, 2018, no. 126, pp. 1683–1692. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.109 (accessed: 20.12.2024).
30. Rahim R. et al. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) Method for Decision Support System in Top Management // International Journal of Engineering &Technology, 2018, no. 7, pp. 290–293. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328132893_Technique_for_Order_of_Preference_by_Similarity_to_Ideal_Solution_TOPSIS_method_for_decision_support_system_in_top_management (accessed: 20.11.2024).
31. Roszkowska E. Multi-criteria Decision Making Models by Applying the Topsis Method to Crisp and Interval Data // Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 2011, vol. 6, pp. 200-230. Available at: https://mcdm.ue.katowice.pl/files/papers/mcdm11(6)_11.pdf (accessed: 20.11.2024).
32. Saaty R.W. The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used // Mathematical modelling, 1987, vol. 9, no. 3-5, pp. 161–176. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0270025587904738 (accessed:25.11.2024).
33. Saghafian S., Hejazi S.R. Multicriteria group decision making using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS procedure // Proceedings of the international conference «Computational Intelligence for Modelling, Control and Automation», Vienna, 2005, vol. 2, pp. 215-221. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/cimca.2005.1631471 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
34. Shamsuzzoha A., Piya S.,Shamsuzzaman M. Application of fuzzy TOPSIS framework for selecting complex project in a case company // Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 2021, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 528-566. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/jgoss-07-2020-0040/full/pdf (accessed: 25.11.2024).
35. Stecyk A. The AHP-TOPSIS Model in the Analysis of the Counties Sustainable Development in the West Pomeranian Province in 2010 and 2017 // Journal of Ecological Engineering, 2019, vol. 20, iss. 7, pр. 233–244. Available at: https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/109870 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
36. Tamošaitienė J., Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z. Multi-criteria risk assessment of a construction project // Procedia Computer Science, 2013, no. 17, pр. 129-133. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050913001518 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
37. Tsukida K., Gupta M.R. How to Analyze Paired Comparison Data // UWEE Technical Report, Number UWEETR-2011-0004, 2011, 20 p. Available at: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA543806.pdf (accessed: 18.11.2024).
38. Zhao D.-Y., Ma Y.-Y., Lin H.-L. Using the Entropy and TOPSIS Models to Evaluate Sustainable Development of Islands: A Case in China // Sustainability, 2022, no. 14 (3707). Available at: https:// doi.org/10.3390/su14063707 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
2. Лобкова Е.В. Применение метода TOPSIS при решении задачи оценки устойчивости развития территорий // Экономические науки, 2019, no. 172, с. 47–51.
3. Малафеевский Т.А. Интеграция процессного подхода и методики TOPSIS для оценки благосостояния регионов России // Петербургский экономический журнал, 2022, no. 1–2, с. 6–16.
4. Мамедова М.Г., Джабpаилова З.Г. Инфоpмационные технологии в оpганизационных и социально-экономических системах // Информационные технологии, 2016, т. 22, no. 6, с. 467–480.
5. Нефедов А.С., Шакиров В.А. Многокритериальная оценка альтернатив на основе метода TOPSIS в условиях неопределенности предпочтений лица, принимающего решения // Информационные технологии. Проблемы и решения, 2019, no. 3 (8), с. 25–32.
6. Птускин А.С., Левнер Е., Жукова Ю.М. Многокритериальная модель определения наилучшей доступной технологии при нечетких исходных данных // Вестник МГТУ им. Н.Э. Баумана. Сер. Машиностроение, 2016, no. 6, с. 105-127.
7. Терентьев В.Б., Терентьева А.В. Модернизация метода идеальной точки // Вестник Московского авиационного института, 2017, т. 24, no. 4, с. 213–220.
8. Халицкая К. Выбор технологий с помощью метода TOPSIS // ФОРСАЙТ, 2020, т. 14, no. 1, с. 85–96.
9. Юрков А.В., Бабаева Ж.Р. ESG-рейтинги: непараметрические методы построения // Управленческое консультирование, 2024, no. 2, с. 92–107.
10. Baylan E.B. A Novel Project Risk Assessment Method Development via AHP-TOPSIS Hybrid Algorithm // Emerging Science Journal, 2020, vol. 4, no.5, pp. 390–410. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.28991/esj-2020-01239 (accessed: 22.04.2025).
11. Chakraborty S. TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis // Decision Analytics Journal, 2022, no. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2021.100021 (accessed: 02.04.2025).
12. Fahimi K., Jafari Shahrestani A., Zamaninejad A. R., Kaboli F. Proposing a Performance Assessment Model for the Tehran Municipality Using TOPSIS and AHP // Journal of applied research on industrial engineering, 2024, no. 11 (2), pp. 298-317. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22105/jarie.2024.407131.1554 (accessed: 02.04.2025).
13. Ferova I.S., Lobkova E.V., Tanenkova E.N., Kozlova S.A. Tools for assessing sustainable development of territories taking into account cluster effects // Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 2019, no. 12 (4), pp. 600–626. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/toolsfor-assessing-sustainable-developmentof-territories-taking-into-account-clustereffects (accessed: 21.04.2025).
14. Gaspars-Wieloch H. Scenario planning as a new application area for TOPSIS // Operations Research and Decisions, 2023, vol. 33, no.2, pp. 23–34. Available at: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27315335.pdf (accessed: 21.04.2025).
15. Husin S., Fachrurrazi F., Rizalihadi M., Mubarak M. Implementing Fuzzy TOPSIS on Project Risk Variable Ranking // Hindawi. Advances in Civil Engineering, vol. 2019, 10 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9283409 (accessed: 21.04.2025).
16. Hwang C.L., Yoon К. Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making // Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer-Verlag, 1981, pp. 58–191. Available at: https://eprints. n o t t i n g h a m . a c . u k / i d / e p r i n t / 7 1 8 2 0 (accessed: 21.12.2024).
17. Jabbarzadeh A. Application of the AHP and TOPSIS in project management // Journal of Project Management, 2018, no. 3, pp. 125-130. Available at: https://www.growingscience.com/jpm/Vol3/ jpm_2018_1.pdf (accessed: 28.12.2024).
18. Jaber H. et al. A Framework to Evaluate Project Complexity Using the Fuzzy TOPSIS Method // Sustainability, 2021, no. 13. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063020 (accessed: 28.12.2024).
19. Korkmaz M., Gurer D. Financial performance evaluation of forest village cooperatives: A multi-criteria TOPSIS approach // Cerne, 2018, no. 24, pp. 280–287. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329693301_Financial_performance_evaluation_of_forest_village_cooperatives_A_multicriteria_topsis_approach (accessed: 28.12.2024).
20. Lin Sh.-W., Lo H.-W., Gul M. An assessment model for national sustainable development based on the hybrid DEA and modified TOPSIS techniques // Complex & Intelligent Systems, 2023, no. 9, pp. 5449–5466. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01034-2 (accessed: 22.12.2024).
21. Madanchian M., Taherdoost Н. A comprehensive guide to the TOPSIS method for multi-criteria decision making // Sustainable Social Development, 2023, vol. 1, issue 1. Available at: https://papers. ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4626727 (accessed: 22.12.2024).
22. Marzouka M., Sabbah M. AHP-TOPSIS social sustainability approach for selecting supplier in construction supply chain // Cleaner Environmental Systems, 2021, no. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100034 (accessed: 20.12.2024).
23. Maydeu-Olivares A. On Thurstone’s Model for Paired Comparisons and Ranking Data // New Developments in Psychometrics, Springer, 2003, pp. 519–526. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236623596_On_Thurstone’s_Model_for_Paired_Comparisons_and_Ra n k i n g _ D a t a # fu l l Te x t F i l e C o n t e n t (accessed: 18.11.2024).
24. Mumcu A., Gök M. Application of fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for manager selection // Aralık, 2021, December, pp. 270-280. Available at: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1672363 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
25. Nascimento C.R. S.M.S., de Almeida-Filho A.T., Palha R.P. A TOPSIS-Based Decision Model to Establish Priorities for Sequencing the Design of Construction Projects in the Public Sector // Hindawi. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2023. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/1414294 (accessed: 10.11.2024).
26. Norouzi A., Namin H.G. A Hybrid Fuzzy TOPSIS – Best Worst Method for Risk Prioritization in Megaprojects // Civil Engineering Journal, 2019, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1257-1272. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.28991/cej-2019-03091330 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
27. Pangsri P. Application of the Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods for Project Selection // Universal Journal of Management, 2015, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 15–20. Available at: https://www.hrpub.org/download/20141201/UJM3-12102910.pdf (accessed: 18.11.2024).
28. Parida P.K., Sahoo S.K. Multiple Attributes Decision Making Approach by TOPSIS Technique // International Journal of Engineering Research &Technology, 2013, vol.2, issue 11, pp. 907–912. Available at:https://www.ijert.org/research/multiple-attributes-decisionmaking-approach-by-topsis-technique-IJERTV2IS110272.pdf (accessed: 20.11.2024)
29. Piwowarski M. et al. TOPSIS and VIKOR methods in study of sustainable development in the EU countries // Procedia Computer Science, 2018, no. 126, pp. 1683–1692. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.109 (accessed: 20.12.2024).
30. Rahim R. et al. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) Method for Decision Support System in Top Management // International Journal of Engineering &Technology, 2018, no. 7, pp. 290–293. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328132893_Technique_for_Order_of_Preference_by_Similarity_to_Ideal_Solution_TOPSIS_method_for_decision_support_system_in_top_management (accessed: 20.11.2024).
31. Roszkowska E. Multi-criteria Decision Making Models by Applying the Topsis Method to Crisp and Interval Data // Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 2011, vol. 6, pp. 200-230. Available at: https://mcdm.ue.katowice.pl/files/papers/mcdm11(6)_11.pdf (accessed: 20.11.2024).
32. Saaty R.W. The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used // Mathematical modelling, 1987, vol. 9, no. 3-5, pp. 161–176. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0270025587904738 (accessed:25.11.2024).
33. Saghafian S., Hejazi S.R. Multicriteria group decision making using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS procedure // Proceedings of the international conference «Computational Intelligence for Modelling, Control and Automation», Vienna, 2005, vol. 2, pp. 215-221. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/cimca.2005.1631471 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
34. Shamsuzzoha A., Piya S.,Shamsuzzaman M. Application of fuzzy TOPSIS framework for selecting complex project in a case company // Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 2021, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 528-566. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/jgoss-07-2020-0040/full/pdf (accessed: 25.11.2024).
35. Stecyk A. The AHP-TOPSIS Model in the Analysis of the Counties Sustainable Development in the West Pomeranian Province in 2010 and 2017 // Journal of Ecological Engineering, 2019, vol. 20, iss. 7, pр. 233–244. Available at: https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/109870 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
36. Tamošaitienė J., Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z. Multi-criteria risk assessment of a construction project // Procedia Computer Science, 2013, no. 17, pр. 129-133. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050913001518 (accessed: 25.11.2024).
37. Tsukida K., Gupta M.R. How to Analyze Paired Comparison Data // UWEE Technical Report, Number UWEETR-2011-0004, 2011, 20 p. Available at: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA543806.pdf (accessed: 18.11.2024).
38. Zhao D.-Y., Ma Y.-Y., Lin H.-L. Using the Entropy and TOPSIS Models to Evaluate Sustainable Development of Islands: A Case in China // Sustainability, 2022, no. 14 (3707). Available at: https:// doi.org/10.3390/su14063707 (accessed: 18.11.2024).
Published
2025-07-29
How to Cite
Sychova, N. V. (2025). Methodology for prioritization of sustainable rural development projects. Modern Economics: Problems and Solutions, 6, 51-71. https://doi.org/10.17308/meps/2078-9017/2025/6/51-71
Issue
Section
Regional Economics
