Open Access Research Article

Decision-Making on Green Vehicles Using a Hybrid Taxonomy Approach with Reference-Based Methods

Authors

Maryam Yousefi Vardanjani Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Reza Gholamian * Department of Logistics and Supply Chain Engineering, Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Nazanin Maleki Department of Science in Macrosystems, Faculty of Industrial Engineering, University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.48313/scodm.v3i2.56

Downloads

Abstract

Nowadays, decision-making in the selection of green vehicles in Iran has become a major challenge, as choosing an appropriate vehicle has a significant impact on fuel consumption, air pollution, and environmental protection. Therefore, the use of suitable Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) algorithms in this field appears to be essential. This study aims to analyze and propose an effective and efficient approach for decision-making related to the selection of green vehicles. In this research, a framework combining three MCDM methods, EDAS, VIKOR, and Taxonomy, has been employed to achieve optimal selection and facilitate the process of choosing green vehicles. By utilizing the characteristics of all three decision-making algorithms, the proposed algorithm enables accurate analysis through assigning weights to each criterion, thereby contributing to more intelligent economic and environmental decision-making in the selection of green vehicles. Based on the conducted analyses and the results obtained from the proposed EDAS–VIKOR–Taxonomy MCDM method, Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) were identified as the best green vehicles for entering the Iranian automotive market. The production of this type of vehicle in Iran's automotive industry can represent an effective and significant step toward environmental protection, air pollution control, and fuel consumption management.

Keywords

Green vehicles Multi-criteria decision-making VIKOR decision-making method EDAS decision-making method Taxonomy decision-making method

References (24)

[1] Muneer, T., Milligan, R., Smith, I., Doyle, A., Pozuelo, M., & Knez, M. (2015). Energetic, environmental and economic performance of electric vehicles: Experimental evaluation. Transportation research part d: transport and environment, 35, 40–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.11.015

[2] Amiri, M., Rahimi Mazrae Shahi, M., & Taboli, H. (2012). A New Methodology for Solving Multi-criteria Decision Making Problem. Industrial management studies, 9(24), 45–65. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.22518029.1391.9.24.3.0

[3] Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Olfat, L., & Turskis, Z. (2015). Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS). Informatica, 26(3), 435–451. https://doi.org/10.3233/INF-2015-1070

[4] Dhumras, H., & Bajaj, R. K. (2023). Modified EDAS method for MCDM in robotic agrifarming with picture fuzzy soft Dombi aggregation operators. Soft computing, 27(8), 5077–5098. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-07927-1%0A%0A

[5] Özkan, B., Özceylan, E., Kabak, M., & Dikmen, A. U. (2021). Evaluation of criteria and COVID-19 patients for intensive care unit admission in the era of pandemic: A multi-criteria decision making approach. Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 209, 106348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106348

[6] Dumrul, C., Bilgili, F., Zarali, F., Dumrul, Y., & Kiliçarslan, Z. (2024). The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives in Turkey using intuitionistic-fuzzy EDAS methodology. Environmental science and pollution research, 31(10), 15503–15524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-31816-7%0A%0A

[7] Khan, H. U., Ali, F., Sohail, M., Nazir, S., & Arif, M. (2025). Decision making for selection of smart vehicle transportation system using VIKOR approach. International journal of data science and analytics, 19(4), 793–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-024-00537-6%0A%0A

[8] Zheng, G., & Wang, X. (2020). The comprehensive evaluation of renewable energy system schemes in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method. Energy, 193, 116676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116676

[9] Cevikbas, M., Okudan, O., & Işık, Z. (2023). Determination of the most appropriate alternative dispute resolution methods for airport projects: A fuzzy VIKOR approach. KSCE journal of civil engineering, 27(8), 3192-3203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-023-1864-4%0A%0A

[10] Liu, P., & Wang, D. (2022). An extended taxonomy method based on normal T-spherical fuzzy numbers for multiple-attribute decision-making. International journal of fuzzy systems, 24(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-021-01109-7%0A%0A

[11] Cinelli, M., Kadziński, M., Gonzalez, M., & Słowiński, R. (2020). How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy. Omega, 96, 102261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2020.102261

[12] Jabalameli, M. S., Shahanaghi, K., Hosnavi, R., & Nasiri, M. R. (2010). A combined model for locating critical centers (HAPIT). International journal of industrial engineering & production research, 20(4), 65–76. (In Persian). https://scispace.com/pdf/a-combined-model-for-locating-critical-centers-hapit-4tmn7bfano.pdf

[13] Faraji, S. H., Badri, S. A. L. I., & Vazin, N. (2013). Improvement of numerical taxonomy model. Journal of applied researches in geographical sciences, 13(28), 113-135. (In persian). https://www.sid.ir/paper/102156/en

[14] Sonar, H. C., & Kulkarni, S. D. (2021). An integrated AHP-MABAC approach for electric vehicle selection. Research in transportation business & management, 41, 100665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100665

[15] Offer, G. J., Howey, D., Contestabile, M., Clague, R., & Brandon, N. P. (2010). Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system. Energy policy, 38(1), 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.08.040

[16] Egbue, O., & Long, S. (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy policy, 48, 717–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009

[17] Nanaki, E. A., & Koroneos, C. J. (2013). Comparative economic and environmental analysis of conventional, hybrid and electric vehicles--the case study of Greece. Journal of cleaner production, 53, 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.010

[18] Yagcitekin, B., Uzunoglu, M., Karakas, A., & Erdinc, O. (2015). Assessment of electrically-driven vehicles in terms of emission impacts and energy requirements: a case study for Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of cleaner production, 96, 486–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.063

[19] Junquera, B., Moreno, B., & Álvarez, R. (2016). Analyzing consumer attitudes towards electric vehicle purchasing intentions in Spain: Technological limitations and vehicle confidence. Technological forecasting and social change, 109, 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.05.006

[20] Egnér, F., & Trosvik, L. (2018). Electric vehicle adoption in Sweden and the impact of local policy instruments. Energy policy, 121, 584–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.06.040

[21] Liu, X., Reddi, K., Elgowainy, A., Lohse-Busch, H., Wang, M., & Rustagi, N. (2020). Comparison of well-to-wheels energy use and emissions of a hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle relative to a conventional gasoline-powered internal combustion engine vehicle. International journal of hydrogen energy, 45(1), 972–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.10.192

[22] Gong, B., Liu, R., & Zhang, X. (2020). Market acceptability assessment of electric vehicles based on an improved stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis-evidential reasoning approach. Journal of cleaner production, 269, 121990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121990

[23] Ziemba, P. (2021). Multi-criteria approach to stochastic and fuzzy uncertainty in the selection of electric vehicles with high social acceptance. Expert systems with applications, 173, 114686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114686

[24] Alinezhad, A., Khalili, J., & others. (2019). New methods and applications in multiple attribute decision making (MADM) (Vol. 277). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114686

Article Metrics

Published 2026-06-01
Issue Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Section Articles
Document Type Research Article
Views 419
Downloads 210

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View License Details

How to Cite

Yousefi Vardanjani, M. ., Gholamian, M. R. ., & Maleki, N. . (2026). Decision-Making on Green Vehicles Using a Hybrid Taxonomy Approach with Reference-Based Methods. Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making, 3(2), 110-126. https://doi.org/10.48313/scodm.v3i2.56

Download Citation

Similar Articles

Saba Khorasanipour, Mohammad Ali Beheshtinia , Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework for Supplier Selection in the Power Industry: A Case Study of the Mazandaran Regional Electricity Company , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Sayedeh Saeideh Azarmina, Mohammad Saber Fallahnejad, Hassan Khademi Zare, A Combined Knowledge-Driven and Data-Driven Approach to Selecting Resilient Suppliers Based on Heterogeneous Information (Case Study: Steel Industry) , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Fahimeh Tanhaie, Asma Izanloo, A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Green Supply Chain Management: Supplier Prioritization in the Automotive Industry , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Majid Bagheri Ghadikolaei, Abdollah Aghaei, Optimizing Last-Mile Delivery with Crowdshipping and Considering Carriers' Acceptance Probability , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 3 No. 4 (2026): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Mahdi Razaghi, Mahtab Esmaeili, Seyed Esmaeil Najafi, When does the Uncertainty Budget Change the Design? A Decision-Response Diagnostic for Robust Closed-Loop Supply Chain Network Design , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Mina Kazemi, Abolghasem Mehrabi, Amin Anbarzadeh, Zahra Farahani, Applying A Multi-Objective Genetic Optimization Algorithm to Select Automotive Parts Suppliers , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Maedeh Fasihia, Seyyed Abbas Ebrahimi, Designing Antifragile and Agile Food Supply Chains , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Mehdi Kianiha, Masoud Rahiminezhad Golankeshi, Roghieh Bazoubandi, Evaluating and Ranking Supply Chain Distributors Using FAHP and FANP Methods , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Amir abbas Shojaie, Pooyan Hashemi, Evaluating and Selecting Suppliers in the Setareh Flour Milling Company Supply Chain Using Clustering Techniques , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making
Amirhossein Amou Jafari, Kiana Salehi, Designing Resilient Biomass Energy Supply Networks under Environmental Disruptions and Market Uncertainty: An Integrated Data-Driven Clustering, MCDM, and Bi-Level Optimization Framework , Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making: Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Supply Chain and Operations Decision Making

1-10 of 52 Next

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.