The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Determining Weighting Coefficients for Sustainable Development Indicators of Maritime Transport Enterprises
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32515/2663-1636.2026.15(48).147-156Keywords:
sustainable development, maritime transport enterprises, analytic hierarchy process, weighting coefficients, decarbonization, environmental sustainability.Abstract
The purpose of the article is the development and practical testing of a methodological approach for determining the weighting coefficients of sustainable development indicators for maritime transport enterprises based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The study is aimed at addressing the fundamental problem of objectivity in constructing composite indicators, where the traditional approach of equal weight distribution often leads to distorted diagnostic results.
Within the framework of the research, T. Saaty’s algorithm was fully implemented to assess the environmental component of sustainable development, which includes nine individual indicators. The author developed a pairwise comparison matrix based on the priority of decarbonization and the energy transition. The research process covered the stages of matrix normalization, calculation of priority vectors, and a thorough verification of the consistency of the obtained results. The calculated consistency ratio (CR = 0.0072) confirmed high logical consistency in expert judgments. Particular attention is paid to such critical factors as the share of alternative fuels, carbon intensity, and the volume of "green" investments, which allowed for the derivation of mathematically substantiated weighting coefficients.
Based on the research results, a model for calculating the composite index of environmental sustainability was developed. It was established that the greatest impact on environmental sustainability is exerted by the share of alternative fuels (0.240), carbon intensity (0.171), and the share of environmental investments (0.171). The resulting model enables accurate and objective diagnostics, as well as quantitative management of sustainable development processes in the maritime sector. Prospects for further research consist in extending the proposed approach to the economic and social components of sustainable development, which in the future will allow for the formation of a holistic integral index for the comprehensive assessment and spatial diagnostics of the sustainable development of maritime transport enterprises.
References
1. Hutsaliuk, O.M., & Remzina, N.A. (2020). Methodological foundations of the formation of a single through tariff for multimodal transportation. Tsentralnoukrainskyi naukovyi visnyk. Ekonomichni nauky. 4 (37), 169-176. [in Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.32515/2663-1636.2020.4(37).169-176 .
2. Hutsaliuk, O.M., & Obniavko, T.S. (2021). Directions of economic and ecological transformation of enterprises of the defense-industrial complex of Ukraine. Tsentralnoukrainskyi naukovyi visnyk. Ekonomichni nauky. 6 (39), 211-219. [in Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.32515/2663-1636.2021.6(39).211-219.
3. Kudriavtsev, V. M., & Kudriavtseva, O. V. (2023). Methodology for assessing the level of sustainable development of a transport enterprise. Ekonomika transportnoho kompleksu, 42, 168-181 [in Ukrainian].
4. Navrozova,Yu. O. (2025). Methodological approach to comprehensive assessment and spatial diagnostics of sustainable development of a maritime transport enterprise. Visnyk Skhidnoyevropeiskoho universytetu ekonomiky I menedzhmentu. 2 (34), 177-197 [in Ukrainian].
5. Navrozova, Yu.O. (2025). Methodological principles for assessing the level of sustainable development of maritime transport enterprises. Upravlinnia zminamy ta innovatsiiamy, (15), 101-107. [in Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.32782/CMI/2025-15-16.
6. Pysmenna, O. O. Somova, L. I. & Papusha E. (2018). Integral assessment of corporate social responsibility of an industrial enterprise. Ekonomika i Suspilstvo. 19, 548-551. [in Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2018-19-84.
7. Shaposhnikov, D.S. (2025). Methodological approaches to assessing the digital sustainability of ports in the strategy of sustainable development of maritime transport. Rozvytok metodiv upravlinnia ta hospodariuvannia na transporti. Odesa: ONMU, 4(93), 7-19. [in Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.31375/2226-1915-2025-4-7-19.
8. Annual Safety Statistics Report 2024 (2024). IMCA, 16. https://www.imca-int.com/media/pftlykx0/imca-safety-stats-report-2024.pdf [in English].
9. Chakrabartty, S.N. (2024). Port Sustainability Index: Methodological Issues. J Eng & Environ Sci 2024, 2(1): 000107. [in English] https://doi.org/10.23880/jeesc-16000107.
10. Database. Eurostat. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/data/database [in English].
11. Jelena, J. Stanković, Jelena J. Stanković, Ivana Marjanović (2021). Social, Economic and Environmental Sustainability of Port Regions: MCDM Approach in Composite Index Creation. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 9(1), 74; [in English]. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9010074.
12. Muangpan, Thanyaphat; Kamonchanok, Suthiwartnarueput (2019). Key performance indicators of sustainable port: Case study of the eastern economic corridor in Thailand. Muangpan & Suthiwartnarueput, Cogent Business & Management, 6: 1603275 [in English].https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1603275.
13. Peter Scholten, Sander Raphaël, Jasper Faber (CE Delft) & Bart Kreulen, Alex Ouwehand (2023). Benchmark for seaport sustainability, 155 [in English].
14. Peris-Mora, E., Diez Orejas, J.M., Subirats, A., Ibáñez, S., Alvarez, P. (2005). Development of a system of indicators for sustainable port management, 50, 12, 1649-1660. [in English]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.06.048.
15. Pranyoto, Fitri Kensiwi, Kundori Kundori, Riswan, Astyono (2024). Developing an integrated sustainability assessment framework: evaluating environmental, social, economic and governance performance at Panjang port. International journal of multidisciplinary and current research, 6(6): 12-20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385706146_Developing_an_Integrated_Sustainability_Assessment_Framework_Evaluating_Environmental_Social_Economic_and_Governance_Performance_at_Panjang_Port [in English].
16. Review of Maritime Transport 2023 (2023). UNCTAD. 2023. https://iims-media-library.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/06121807/UNCTAD-Review-2023.pdf [in English].
17. Roadmap to Zero Emission from International Shipping (2020). Shipping Zero Emission Project. Japan Ship Technology Research Association. 135 p.https://www.cdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Environment/Documents/ [in English].
18. Saaty, T.L. (2008). Decision making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 83–98. [in English].
19. Saaty, T.L. (1994). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process; RWS Publications: Pittsburg, CA, USA. [in English].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yulia Navrozova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
