The sustainability evaluation of engineering processes and structures is a multifaceted challenge requiring the integration of diverse and often conflicting criteria. To address this challenge, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods have emerged as effective tools. However, the selection of the most suitable MCDM approach for problems involving multiple criteria is critical to ensuring robust, reliable, and actionable outcomes. Equally significant is the choice of a proper normalization technique, which plays a pivotal role in determining the robustness and reliability of the results. This study investigates the impact of common MCDM tools on the decision-making process concerning diverse aspects of sustainability. It also examines how different normalization methods influence the final outcomes. Sustainability in this context is understood as a trade-off among five key dimensions: performance, environmental impact, economic impact, social impact, and circularity. The outcome of the MCDM process is represented by an aggregated metric, referred to as the Sustainability Index (SI). This index offers a comprehensive and robust framework for evaluating sustainability and facilitating decision-making when conflicting criteria are present. To assess the effects of implementing different MCDM and normalization choices on the sustainability assessment, a dataset from the aviation sector is employed. Specifically, a typical aircraft component is analyzed as a case study for holistic sustainability assessment, utilizing data that represent the various dimensions of sustainability mentioned above, for this component. Additionally, the study investigates the influence of initial data variations and weight variations within the MCDM process on the results. The results indicate that, overall, the different MCDM and normalization methods lead to similar outcomes when applied to the design alternatives. However, a deeper dive into the results reveals that the weighted sum method, when paired with min-max normalization, appears to be more appropriate, based on the use case involved for the present investigation, due to its robustness regarding small variations in the initial data and its sensitivity to large ones. This research underscores the critical importance of selecting appropriate MCDM tools and normalization methods to enhance transparency, robustness, reliability, and consistency of sustainability assessments within a holistic framework.

Climate change and global warming pose great sustainability challenges to the aviation industry. Alternatives to petroleum-based fuels (hydrogen, natural gas, etc.) have emerged as promising aviation fuels for future aircraft. The present study aimed to contribute to the understanding of the impact of material selection on aviation sustainability, accounting for the type of fuel implemented and circular economy aspects. In this context, a decision support tool was introduced to aid decision-makers and relevant stakeholders to identify and select the best-performing materials that meet their defined needs and preferences, expressed through a finite set of conflicting criteria associated with ecological, economic, and circularity aspects. The proposed tool integrates life-cycle-based metrics extending to both ecological and economical dimensions and a proposed circular economy indicator (CEI) focused on the material/component level and linked to its quality characteristics, which also accounts for the quality degradation of materials which have undergone one or more recycling loops. The tool is coupled with a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methodology in order to reduce subjectivity when determining the importance of each of the considered criteria.

When it comes to achieving sustainability and circular economy objectives, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tools can be of aid in supporting decision-makers to reach a satisfying solution, especially when conflicting criteria are present. In a previous work of the authors, a hybrid MCDM tool was introduced to support the selection of sustainable materials in aviation. The reliability of an MCDM tool depends decisively on its robustness. Hence, in the present work, the robustness of the aforementioned tool has been assessed by conducting an extensive sensitivity analysis. To this end, the extent to which the results are affected by the normalization method involved in the proposed MCDM tool is examined. In addition, the sensitivity of the final output to the weights’ variation as well as to the data values variation has been investigated towards monitoring the stability of the tool in terms of the final ranking obtained. In order to carry out the analysis, a case study from the aviation industry has been considered. In the current study, carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) components, both virgin and recycled, are assessed and compared with regard to their sustainability by accounting for metrics linked to their whole lifecycle. The latter assessment also accounts for the impact of the fuel type utilized during the use phase of the components. The results show that the proposed tool provides an effective and robust method for the evaluation of the sustainability of aircraft components. Moreover, the present work can provide answers to questions raised concerning the adequacy of the CFRP recycled parts performance and their expected contribution towards sustainability and circular economy goals in aviation.