IJAHP COMMUNITY AT IJCIEOM: RESEARCH AND COLLABORATION IN ITALY Posted on 2025-07-18

                                                                                        Valerio A. P. Salomon
                                                                 Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Brazil

                                                                                        Antonella Petrillo
                                                    Parthenope University of Naples (UNIPARTHENOPE), Italy

Highlights from IJCIEOM 2025

From June 23 to 25, 2025, the 31st International Joint Conference of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IJCIEOM) took place at the Polytech University of Bari (POLIBA), Italy. The main theme of the 31st IJCIEOM was “Redesigning industrial systems towards a sustainable, resilient, and human-centric future in the digital era”. Among 17 special sessions, Prof. Antonella Petrillo and Prof. Fabio De Felice, from Parthenope University of Naples (UNIPARTHENOPE), Italy, with Prof. Valerio Salomon, from Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Brazil, chaired the Special Session 12, titled “Analytic Hierarchy Process applied to circular economy, ESG, and sustainability”.

The 31st IJCIEOM began on Monday afternoon, June 23. In a plenary session, the European School of Industrial Engineering & Management was founded. The ceremonial opening session was chaired by Prof. Francesco Paolo Sisto, Italian Deputy Minister of Justice.

Special Session 12, chaired by Prof. Lorenzo Ardito, POLIBA, in Room Aula 12, began at 4 PM on Tuesday, June 24., Prof. Salomon presented four works:

  • “Drivers, challenges and barriers for circular supply chain implementation: Multi-criteria approach using AHP” coauthored by Prof. Claudemir Tramarico, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and Prof. Anna Florek-Paszkowska, Peru.
  • “Smart and sustainable cities: A study from the perspectives of AHP and ESG” coauthored by Mrs. Eriane Carvalho, UNESP, Prof. Pedro Palominos, Chile, Prof. Rubens Dias, UNESP, and Prof. Marcela Freitas, UNESP.
  • “Analytic Hierarchy Process applied to the development and use of biodegradable packaging in the food industry” coauthored by Ms. Carolina Ratti, UNESP, Prof. Petrillo, and Prof. Tramarico.
  • “Strategic energy planning for dairy industry expansion: A multi-criteria approach” coauthored by Mr. Peterson Maurício, Prof. Denilson dos Santos, and Prof. Jorge Formiga, all from UNESP.

The last day of the conference begun with parallel sessions and the plenary session “New frontiers on research in industrial engineering & operations management” by Prof. Abdelaziz Bouras, University of Qatar. At the Closing Ceremony, IJCIEOM organizers announced Aveiro, Portugal, as the host city of the next conference. Since the International Symposium on the AHP became online, it will be a great opportunity for members of the international AHP community to meet again, in person, in the University of Aveiro, May–June 2026. See you there!

Spotlight on AHP

Taking advantage of his participation in IJCIEOM, Prof. Salomon managed a strategic stop in Naples on June 20 for an engaging academic visit to the Department of Engineering at Parthenope University of Naples (UNIPARTHENOPE). The visit provided a unique opportunity to strengthen collaboration within the AHP community and exchange cutting-edge ideas on multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM).

Kicking off the visit, Prof. Salomon delivered an invited talk titled “Research Trends on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making”, offering participants a clear and structured overview of the field.

A highlight of his talk was the clarification of a long-standing misunderstanding about AHP’s role within MCDM. Drawing on the classification by Zavadskas et al. (2014), Prof. Salomon emphasized the distinction between multi-attribute analysis, where AHP belongs, and multi-objective optimization, which involves entirely different methodologies. “Criticisms of AHP for not achieving what it’s not designed to do are misguided,” he noted, referencing Saaty et al. (2009). “AHP is not an optimization tool, and principles such as Pareto Optimality simply don’t apply to it.”

One of the most compelling parts of the presentation focused on rank reversal (RR) - a topic often at the heart of debates around AHP. Prof. Salomon traced RR’s history, from its early criticism (Belton & Gear, 1983) to its recognition as a phenomenon present in many MCDM methods, including ELECTRE, MAUT, and TOPSIS (Triantaphyllou, 2000). Importantly, he argued that RR is not necessarily a flaw - in fact, in certain contexts, it is not only acceptable but methodologically sound.

Using examples from supply chain management, he demonstrated how AHP offers unique flexibility: RR can be either allowed or avoided depending on the synthesis approach - relative or absolute - and the type of measurement used. As detailed in Salomon et al. (2016), this versatility turns what was once seen as a limitation into a strength. “In AHP, RR is not a bug,” Prof. Salomon concluded, “it’s a feature - one that gives decision-makers a choice depending on context and goals.”

Figure 1 presents a group photo taken at the end of the UNIPARTHENOPE meeting, with Prof. Petrillo and Prof. Salomon at the center.

Figure 1 Group photo of Petrillo–Salomon meeting, UNIPARTHENOPE, June 20, 2025

Acknowledgements

To the Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Grant No. FAPESP 2023/14761-5.

                                                                   REFERENCES

Belton, V., & Gear, T. (1983). On a short-coming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies. Omega, 11(3), 228–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(83)90047-6

Saaty, T. L., Vargas, L. G., & Whitaker, R. (2009). Addressing with brevity criticisms of the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 1(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v1i2.53

Salomon, V. A. P., Tramarico, C. L., & Marins, F. A. S. (2016). Analytic Hierarchy Process applied to supply chain management. In F. De Felice, T. L. Saaty, & A. Petrillo (Eds.), Applications and theory of Analytic Hierarchy Process: Decision making for strategic decisions (pp. 1–16). InTech Open. https://doi.org/10.5772/64022

Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Springer.

Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.892037