DOI: https://doi.org/10.61435/ijred.2026.63055
View PDF Download fulltext

An integrated interval-valued q-Rung Orthopair fuzzy DEMATEL–Choquet integral framework for prioritizing investment drivers of green energy in marine sector: A case study in Vietnam

1Logistics and Services Department, University of Transport Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam

2Faculty of Economics, Society and Environment, Academy of Politics Region II, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam

Received: 6 Jun 2026; Revised: 17 Aug 2026; Accepted: 29 Aug 2026; Published: 8 Sep 2026.
Editor(s): H Hadiyanto
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Centre of Biomass and Renewable Energy (CBIORE)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

With the rising demand for energy, the commitments to decarbonization and international regulations in the marine sector, the move towards sustainable maritime energy systems has become a strategic priority for Vietnam. It is thus important to understand what the most important investment drivers are in order to help with evidence-based policy development and effective resource allocation. This study aims to build an integrated framework using interval-valued q-rung orthopair fuzzy (IVq-ROF) DEMATEL and Choquet Integral methods to assess and prioritize the fourteen investment criteria that affect Vietnam's maritime energy economy. The expert judgements were gathered using the IVq-ROF linguistic assessment framework, which is used to capture uncertainty and interdependence between the criteria. DEMATEL method was used to identify causal relationships and the importance of the evaluation criteria, and the Choquet integral was used to include the interaction effects to arrive at final importance weights. The results show that three top investment priorities are the government incentives and financial support (0.095), the port energy infrastructure readiness (0.085) and compliance with IMO and national regulations (0.084). Stakeholder acceptance (0.046) and skilled workforce availability (0.054) have comparatively lower interaction adjusted importance, respectively. DEMATEL causal analysis identified port energy infrastructure investment cost (C1) as the strongest driving factor (highest D−R), whereas the interaction-aware Choquet ranking identified government incentives and financial support (0.095), port energy infrastructure readiness (0.085), and compliance with IMO and national regulations (0.084) as the three highest overall investment priorities. The proposed framework well reflects the linkages between economic, technical, environmental, regulatory, and social aspects and offers guidance for practical implementation of the maritime energy transition in Vietnam through integrated investment planning and sustainable infrastructure development to achieve the transition faster.

Keywords: Maritime; Green energy; Energy economy; Decarbonization; MCDM; IVq-ROF DEMATEL

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Article
Language : EN
Recent articles
Drying turmeric slices using a photovoltaic ventilation direct solar dryer: Drying characteristics and interactions of heat and mass transfer Hybrid precursor engineering of g-C₃N₄ toward improved α-Fe₂O₃/g-C₃N₄ photoanodes under HMF hole-scavenging conditions Multiple pathways to a low-carbon future: Examining evidence from the BRICS+ More recent articles
Most cited articles
Modeling and Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic Assisted Electrolyzer-Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cell For Running a Hospital in Remote Area in Kolkata, India Optimum Tilt Angle at Tropical Region Economic Benefit and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Potential of A Family-Scale Cowdung Anaerobic Biogas Digester Process Optimization for Ethyl Ester Production in Fixed Bed Reactor Using Calcium Oxide Impregnated Palm Shell Activated Carbon (CaO/PSAC) Steam gasification of wood biomass in a fluidized biocatalytic system bed gasifier: A model development and validation using experiment and Boubaker Polynomials Expansion Scheme BPES More cited articles
  1. Alshareef, M. H., & Alghanmi, A. F. (2024). Optimizing Maritime Energy Efficiency: A Machine Learning Approach Using Deep Reinforcement Learning for EEXI and CII Compliance. Sustainability, 16(23), 10534. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310534
  2. Alshibani, S., Singhal, A. B., Gupta, B., Papa, A., & Del Giudice, M. (2026). Prioritizing interoperable AI-driven solutions for sustainable circular economy in the public sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 224, 124513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124513
  3. Altınpınar, İ. (2025). Path to Zero Emissions on Maritime Transport: A Multi-Criteria Perspective on Shipowners’ Challenge. Karadeniz Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(1), 550–559. https://doi.org/10.31466/kfbd.1613824
  4. Amat Ventayol, A., Lam, J. S. L., Bai, X., & Chen, Z. S. (2025). Comparative life cycle assessment of hydrogen internal combustion engine and fuel cells in shipping. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 109, 774–788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2025.02.150
  5. Anwar, M., & Li, S. (2021). Spurring competitiveness, financial and environmental performance of SMEs through government financial and non-financial support. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(5), 7860–7882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00951-3
  6. Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
  7. Battaglia, V., Angrisani, M., Ferretti, M., & Risitano, M. (2024). Maritime Energy Efficiency: Emerging Trends and Key Performance Indicators. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 19(10), 3749–3757. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.191005
  8. Bilgen, M. K., Guneri, B., & Baldıran, S. (2025). Integrated Fermatean Fuzzy SWARA and Q-ROF-EDAS Methodology for Supplier Evaluation in the Shipyard Industry. Journal of Intelligent Decision Making and Granular Computing, 1(1), 48–75. https://doi.org/10.31181/jidmgc1120257
  9. Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2018a). An interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for decision-making problems in maritime transportation engineering: The case of ship loader. Ocean Engineering, 155, 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.039
  10. Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2018b). An interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for decision-making problems in maritime transportation engineering: The case of ship loader. Ocean Engineering, 155, 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.039
  11. Chairunnisa, A. S. (2024). Green Technology Opportunities and Challenges in Sustainable Marine Logistics. Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series, 2(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.62012/collaborate.v2i1.58
  12. Dang, X.-H. A., & Nguyen, T.-T. (2025). The Fuzzy AHP for Prioritizing Factors in the Selection of Shipping Lines within the Maritime Transport Market in Vietnam. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Sustainable Manufacturing and Renewable Energy, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.4108/eetsmre.9150
  13. Dinh, G. H., Pham, H. T., Nguyen, L. C., Dang, H. Q., & Pham, N. D. K. (2024). Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Port Operation Efficiency. Polish Maritime Research, 31(2), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2024-0030
  14. Dinh, G. H., Pham, M. T., Tran, N. B. M., Tran, C. M., Nguyen, T. Q., Le, T. T., & Nguyen, H. P. (2025). Hybrid renewable energy system design for a green port using HOMER Pro: A techno-economic assessment. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 14(4), 767–780. https://doi.org/10.61435/ijred.2025.61344
  15. Do, H. D., Le, D. D. A., Le, T. T., Nguyen, T. K. T., Le, T. T., & Truong, T. H. O. (2026). Orchestrating green ports: An integrated BWM–Fuzzy DEMATEL–ANP–TOPSIS framework for techno-economic prioritization. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 15(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.61435/ijred.2026.61886
  16. Do, H. D., Nguyen, C. S., Nguyen, H. P., Pham, N. D. K., Nguyen, X. P., Tran, X. T., Ölcer, A. I., Le, T. T., & Hoang, A. T. (2026). Barriers and enablers for methanol adoption in shipping towards sustainable maritime: From expert view to policy perspectives. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 101810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2026.101810
  17. Do, H. D., Tam Le, T., Truong, T. H. O., Nguyen, H. P., Khoa Pham, N. D., & Bui, V. D. (2025). A Fuzzy AHP–ANP Approach for Prioritizing Criteria to Develop a Green Shipping Corridor in Vietnam. JOIV : International Journal on Informatics Visualization, 9(6), 2584. https://doi.org/10.62527/joiv.9.6.4891
  18. Domachowski, Z. (2021). Minimizing Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Ships Using a Pareto Multi-Objective Optimization Approach. Polish Maritime Research, 28(2), 96–101. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2021-0026
  19. Duc, N. M., & Nguyen, L. H. (2025). Ranking barriers to green port development: A neutrosophic-fuzzy ISM approach. Maritime Technology and Research, 8(1), 281958. https://doi.org/10.33175/mtr.2026.281958
  20. Dzida, M., & Nguyen, L. H. (2026). A critical review of pathways, fuels, and challenges to achieving decarbonization strategies in the maritime sector. Journal of Transportation and Sustainable Technologies, 1(1), 20–49. https://doi.org/10.55228/jtst.2026.110249
  21. Erdem, P., & Akyuz, E. (2021). An interval type-2 fuzzy SLIM approach to predict human error in maritime transportation. Ocean Engineering, 232, 109161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109161
  22. Gavalas, D. (2025). Green finance frameworks for sustainable shipping industry and blue economy: A review. Maritime Technology and Research, 7(3), Manuscript. https://doi.org/10.33175/mtr.2025.277132
  23. Ghoneim, N., Colak, A., & Amer, A. (2023). Exploring the Regulatory Framework of Maritime Decarbonization to Achieve IMO GHG Emission Targets. Port-Said Engineering Research Journal, 27(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.21608/pserj.2023.209426.1234
  24. Grabisch, M. (1997). Alternative Representations of Discrete Fuzzy Measures for Decision Making. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 05(05), 587–607. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488597000440
  25. Ha, S., Jang, H., Park, C., & Jeong, B. (2026). A prospective life cycle assessment framework for sustainable renewable fuels in international shipping: Hydrogen based e fuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 226, 116219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.116219
  26. Hamid-Mosaku, A., Mahmud, M., Mohd Safie, M., Balogun, A.-L., & Raheem, K. (2024). A Hybrid AHP-TOPIS-Based Marine Economic Activities Evaluation Model for Marine Geospatial Data Infrastructure. UNILAG Journal of Transport and Logistics, 1(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.52968/27529535
  27. Hoang, A. T., Chen, W.-H., López-Escalante, M. C., Guerrero-Pérez, M. O., Rodríguez-Castellón, E., Kowalski, J., Le, T. T., Bui, V. G., & Nguyen, X. P. (2026). Methanol for decarbonization of the maritime sector: From ideological strategy to practical solutions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 229, 116638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.116638
  28. Hoang, A. T., Foley, A. M., Nižetić, S., Huang, Z., Ong, H. C., Ölçer, A. I., Pham, V. V., & Nguyen, X. P. (2022). Energy-related approach for reduction of CO2 emissions: A critical strategy on the port-to-ship pathway. Journal of Cleaner Production, 355, 131772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131772
  29. Hoang, A. T., Pandey, A., Martinez De Osés, F. J., Chen, W.-H., Said, Z., Ng, K. H., Ağbulut, Ü., Tarełko, W., Ölçer, A. I., & Nguyen, X. P. (2023). Technological solutions for boosting hydrogen role in decarbonization strategies and net-zero goals of world shipping: Challenges and perspectives. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 188, 113790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113790
  30. IMO. (2021). Fourth IMO GHG Study 2020 Full Report. International Maritime Organisation, 6(11), 524
  31. Kandakoglu, A., Celik, M., & Akgun, I. (2009). A multi-methodological approach for shipping registry selection in maritime transportation industry. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 49(3–4), 586–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.09.001
  32. Kanrak, M., Keawphinuek, S., Lohapan, N., & Zhou, J. (2026). Analysis of the maritime network and ports in Vietnam. Maritime Technology and Research, 8(3), 285046. https://doi.org/10.33175/mtr.2026.285046
  33. Khan, M. J., Alcantud, J. C. R., Kumam, W., Kumam, P., & Alreshidi, N. A. (2023). Expanding Pythagorean fuzzy sets with distinctive radii: disc Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 9(6), 7037–7054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01062-y
  34. Koilo, V. (2024). Decarbonization in the maritime industry: Factors to create an efficient transition strategy. Environmental Economics, 15(2), 42–63. https://doi.org/10.21511/ee.15(2).2024.04
  35. Koilo, V. (2025). Driving the Circular Economy Through Digital Servitization: Sustainable Business Models in the Maritime Sector. Businesses, 5(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses5010012
  36. Kołakowski, P., Gil, M., & Wróbel, K. (2024). Stakeholders’ view on selecting a prospective location for marine alternative fuels bunkering station. Marine Policy, 164, 106164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106164
  37. Kosai, S., & Unesaki, H. (2016). Conceptualizing maritime security for energy transportation security. Journal of Transportation Security, 9(3–4), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12198-016-0173-2
  38. Kumar, R., & Yadav, C. L. (2026). Advancing India’s green port agenda: The role of stakeholder engagement through structural equation modelling. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 35, 101796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101796
  39. Le, T. T., Nguyen, H. P., Rudzki, K., Rowiński, L., Bui, V. D., Truong, T. H., Le, H. C., & Pham, N. D. K. (2023). Management Strategy for Seaports Aspiring to Green Logistical Goals of IMO: Technology and Policy Solutions. Polish Maritime Research, 30(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2023-0031
  40. Lee, C.-W., Sohn, D.-G., Sang, M.-G., & Lee, C. (2025). Empirical Analysis of Barriers to Collaborative Information Sharing in Maritime Logistics Using Fuzzy AHP Approach. Sustainability, 17(4), 1721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17041721
  41. Levikhin, A. A., & Boryaev, A. A. (2025). Low-carbon ammonia-based fuel for maritime transport. Results in Engineering, 25, 104175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104175
  42. Liu, J., Gu, B., & Chen, J. (2023). Enablers for maritime supply chain resilience during pandemic: An integrated MCDM approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 175, 103777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103777
  43. Liu, P., & Wang, P. (2018). Some q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Aggregation Operators and their Applications to Multiple-Attribute Decision Making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 33(2), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21927
  44. Ma, T., Zhe, T., & Xiao, R. (2026). Topics and trends in maritime decarbonization: A structural topic model approach. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 28(1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-025-00328-1
  45. Mansouri, S. A., Lee, H., & Aluko, O. (2015). Multi-objective decision support to enhance environmental sustainability in maritime shipping: a review and future directions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 78, 3–18
  46. Marichal, J.-L. (2000). An axiomatic approach of the discrete Choquet integral as a tool to aggregate interacting criteria. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(6), 800–807. https://doi.org/10.1109/91.890347
  47. Md Arof, A. (2015). The Application of a Combined Delphi-AHP Method in Maritime Transport Research-A Review. Asian Social Science, 11(23). https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n23p73
  48. Naz, S., Akram, M., ul Hassan, M. M., & Fatima, A. (2024). A Hybrid DEMATEL-TOPSIS Approach Using 2-Tuple Linguistic q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information and Its Application in Renewable Energy Resource Selection. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 23(03), 1099–1142. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622023500323
  49. Nguyen, H. P., Hoang, A. T., Nizetic, S., Nguyen, X. P., Le, A. T., Luong, C. N., Chu, V. D., & Pham, V. V. (2021). The electric propulsion system as a green solution for management strategy of CO2 emission in ocean shipping: A comprehensive review. International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems, 31(11), e12580. https://doi.org/10.1002/2050-7038.12580
  50. Nguyen, H. P., Nguyen, P. Q. P., & Nguyen, T. P. (2022). Green Port Strategies in Developed Coastal Countries as Useful Lessons for the Path of Sustainable Development: A Case study in Vietnam. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 11(4), 950–962. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2022.46539
  51. Nguyen, H. P., Pham, N. D. K., & Bui, V. D. (2022). Technical-Environmental Assessment of Energy Management Systems in Smart Ports. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 11(4), 889–901. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2022.46300
  52. Nguyen, L. H., & Nguyen, T. A. (2025). Hybrid MCDM for Repair Strategy Prioritization of Port Handling Equipment: A Fuzzy-ANP- TOPSIS Approach. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 15(5), 1361–1370. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.15.5.13265
  53. Nguyen, S., Gadel, M., Wang, K., Li, J., Zhang, X., Kong, S.-C., Fu, X., & Qin, Z. (2025). Maritime decarbonization through machine learning: A critical systematic review of fuel and power prediction models. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 14, 100210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2025.100210
  54. Nguyen, V.-S., & Im, N.-K. (2019). Automatic Ship Berthing Based on Fuzzy Logic. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of FUZZY LOGIC and INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, 19(3), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2019.19.3.163
  55. Nguyen, V. N., Rudzki, K., Dzida, M., Pham, N. D. K., Pham, M. T., Nguyen, P. Q. P., & Xuan, P. N. (2023). Understanding Fuel Saving and Clean Fuel Strategies Towards Green Maritime. Polish Maritime Research, 30(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2023-0030
  56. Pangalos, G. (2023). Financing for a Sustainable Dry Bulk Shipping Industry: What Are the Potential Routes for Financial Innovation in Sustainability and Alternative Energy in the Dry Bulk Shipping Industry? Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(2), 101. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16020101
  57. Pham, N. D. K., Dinh, G. H., Pham, H. T., Kozak, J., & Nguyen, H. P. (2023). Role of Green Logistics in the Construction of Sustainable Supply Chains. Polish Maritime Research, 30(3), 191–211. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2023-0052
  58. Putra, I. N., Octavian, A., Susilo, A. K., & Prabowo, A. R. (2023). A hybrid AHP-TOPSIS for risk analysis in maritime cybersecurity based on 3D models. Decision Science Letters, 12(4), 759–772. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2023.6.005
  59. Raphael, C. (2025). Digitalization of logistics in East Africa: Potentials and bottlenecks. SCIENCE MUNDI, 5(2), 418–426. https://doi.org/10.51867/scimundi.5.2.39
  60. Ren, J., & Liang, H. (2017). Measuring the sustainability of marine fuels: A fuzzy group multi-criteria decision making approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 54, 12–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.05.004
  61. Satta, G., Vitellaro, F., Njikatoufon, A. G., & Risitano, M. (2025). Green strategies in ports: a stakeholder management perspective. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 27(1), 96–122. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-024-00294-0
  62. Sbitenkova, V. М. (2024). INVESTMENT ENVIRONMENT OF THE NETHERLANDS. Європейський Вектор Економічного Розвитку, 1(36), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.32342/2074-5362-2024-1-36-7
  63. Sevim, C., & Zincir, B. (2025). Selection of optimum sustainable biofuel for maritime transportation using analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2025.2463208
  64. Soner, O., Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2017a). Application of AHP and VIKOR methods under interval type 2 fuzzy environment in maritime transportation. Ocean Engineering, 129, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.11.010
  65. Soner, O., Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2017b). Application of AHP and VIKOR methods under interval type 2 fuzzy environment in maritime transportation. Ocean Engineering, 129, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.11.010
  66. Stanković, J. J., Marjanović, I., Papathanasiou, J., & Drezgić, S. (2021). Social, Economic and Environmental Sustainability of Port Regions: MCDM Approach in Composite Index Creation. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9010074
  67. Suárez de Vivero, J. L., & Rodríguez Mateos, J. C. (2012). The Spanish approach to marine spatial planning. Marine Strategy Framework Directive vs. EU Integrated Maritime Policy. Marine Policy, 36(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2011.03.002
  68. Sudjono, S. S., Hakam, D. F., & Wasesa, M. (2025). Advancing towards indonesia’s net zero emission goals: An in-depth multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) analysis of ship-loader operations in maritime transportation using interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods. Energy Reports, 14, 552–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2025.06.014
  69. Tekeli, M. M., Bal Besikci, E., Gul, M., Akyuz, E., & Arslan, O. (2024). Application of IT2Fs-AHP and TOPSIS modeling for performance analysis of tank coatings in chemical tankers. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 238(3), 622–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/14750902231194703
  70. Tran, T. A. (2020). Effect of ship loading on marine diesel engine fuel consumption for bulk carriers based on the fuzzy clustering method. Ocean Engineering, 207, 107383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107383
  71. Tsioufis, M., Fytopoulos, A., Kalaitzi, D., & Alexopoulos, T. A. (2024). Discovering maritime-piracy hotspots: a study based on AHP and spatio-temporal analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 335(2), 861–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05352-z
  72. UNCTAD. (2023). Review of Maritime Transport 2023: Towards a Green and Just Transition. Stylus Publishing, LLC
  73. Wagner, N. (2025). Towards sustainable maritime transport: Focus on the early phase of technology development related to alternative fuels. Energy for Sustainable Development, 85, 101686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2025.101686
  74. Wan, B., Hu, Z., Garg, H., Cheng, Y., & Han, M. (2023). An integrated group decision-making method for the evaluation of hypertension follow-up systems using interval-valued q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 9(4), 4521–4554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-022-00953-w
  75. Wei, H., Müller-Casseres, E., Belchior, C. R. P., & Szklo, A. (2023). Evaluating the Readiness of Ships and Ports to Bunker and Use Alternative Fuels: A Case Study from Brazil. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(10), 1856. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11101856
  76. Wu, Y., Huang, Y., Wang, H., Zhen, L., & Shao, W. (2022). Green Technology Adoption and Fleet Deployment for New and Aged Ships Considering Maritime Decarbonization. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11010036
  77. Xiao, R., MAa, R., Ma, J., & Wang, J. (2024). The leading maritime capitals of the world: Theoretical traces, measurement baselines and methodology dilemmas. World Regional Studies, 33(9), 104–117. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2024.09.20230485
  78. Xing, H., Stuart, C., Spence, S., & Chen, H. (2021). Alternative fuel options for low carbon maritime transportation: Pathways to 2050. Journal of Cleaner Production, 297, 126651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126651
  79. Yalama, V., Yakovleva, O., Trandafilov, V., & Khmelniuk, M. (2022). Future Sustainable Maritime Sector: Energy Efficiency Improvement and Environmental Impact Reduction for Fishing Carriers Older than 20 Years in the Fleet Part II. Polish Maritime Research, 29(3), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2022-0028
  80. Zhang, X., Wan, J., & Luo, J. (2023). Incentive mechanism-based interval-valued q-rung orthopair fuzzy dynamic comprehensive evaluation method for measuring regional green development level. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 44(4), 5773–5787. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-222505
  81. Zhang, Y., & Lu, X. (2025). Influencing factors systems analysis for the cultivated land protection policies implementation in China: a hybrid DEMATEL-ISM-MICMAC model. Environmental Research Communications, 7(7), 075027. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/adf164

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-09-08 00:08:11

No citation recorded.