A Consensus Framework for Evaluating Dispute Resolution Alternatives in International Law Using an Interval-Valued Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach

This research is motivated by the arbitrary nature of decision-making environments and the dynamic changes in decision patterns, particularly in international dispute resolution. These challenges introduce uncertainties that could be effectively managed by fuzzy logic, which provides a robust framework for evaluating alternatives under multiple criteria. In this study, an Interval-Valued Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS approach is proposed to assess various dispute resolution methods, including negotiation, good offices, mediation, international inquiry, conciliation, international organization, arbitration, and international jurisdiction. Common criteria are determined by examining academic literature and by interviewing relevant experts.—cost-efficiency, duration, impartiality, binding nature, and generalizability are considered essential in determining the best resolution method. The proposed method allows for a nuanced evaluation by incorporating both primary and secondary levels of uncertainty, enabling decision-makers to determine the best alternative solution more reliably. This method’s application extends not only to the international law field but also to industrial engineering, where complex, uncertain decision environments require similarly sophisticated multicriteria decision-making tools. By systematically analyzing these resolution methods, this study aims to provide a structured, quantifiable approach that enhances the decision-making process for both international legal practitioners and engineers working with uncertain and dynamic systems. The results of this study ultimately contribute to improved decision-making outcomes and greater efficiency in multidisciplinary problem solving. The assessments of experts in international law, international relations, and political science in their respective fields of expertise have been gathered to form a consensus. This study contributes to the literature as it is the pioneering application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making techniques in the field of international law. The results of this study imply that the best option from the different decision-maker evaluations is international jurisdiction. Consequently, the utilization of multicriteria decision-making tools can result in more informed and effective decisions in complex and uncertain situations, which is advantageous to both legal practitioners and engineers. Additionally, incorporating different disciplines can help streamline the decision-making process and improve overall efficiency in solving multidisciplinary problems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Sciences
Published
2024-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/app142311046
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.43
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Consensus Framework for Evaluating Dispute Resolution Alternatives in International Law Using an Interval-Valued Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach

Hatice Kübra ECEMİŞ YILMAZ, İbrahim Yılmaz
7 citations
Applied Sciences
Multi-Criteria Decision Making
3.43
article

A Consensus Framework for Evaluating Dispute Resolution Alternatives in International Law Using an Interval-Valued Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach

Hatice Kübra ECEMİŞ YILMAZ, İbrahim Yılmaz
article en
7 citations

Abstract

This research is motivated by the arbitrary nature of decision-making environments and the dynamic changes in decision patterns, particularly in international dispute resolution. These challenges introduce uncertainties that could be effectively managed by fuzzy logic, which provides a robust framework for evaluating alternatives under multiple criteria. In this study, an Interval-Valued Type-2 Fuzzy TOPSIS approach is proposed to assess various dispute resolution methods, including negotiation, good offices, mediation, international inquiry, conciliation, international organization, arbitration, and international jurisdiction. Common criteria are determined by examining academic literature and by interviewing relevant experts.—cost-efficiency, duration, impartiality, binding nature, and generalizability are considered essential in determining the best resolution method. The proposed method allows for a nuanced evaluation by incorporating both primary and secondary levels of uncertainty, enabling decision-makers to determine the best alternative solution more reliably. This method’s application extends not only to the international law field but also to industrial engineering, where complex, uncertain decision environments require similarly sophisticated multicriteria decision-making tools. By systematically analyzing these resolution methods, this study aims to provide a structured, quantifiable approach that enhances the decision-making process for both international legal practitioners and engineers working with uncertain and dynamic systems. The results of this study ultimately contribute to improved decision-making outcomes and greater efficiency in multidisciplinary problem solving. The assessments of experts in international law, international relations, and political science in their respective fields of expertise have been gathered to form a consensus. This study contributes to the literature as it is the pioneering application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making techniques in the field of international law. The results of this study imply that the best option from the different decision-maker evaluations is international jurisdiction. Consequently, the utilization of multicriteria decision-making tools can result in more informed and effective decisions in complex and uncertain situations, which is advantageous to both legal practitioners and engineers. Additionally, incorporating different disciplines can help streamline the decision-making process and improve overall efficiency in solving multidisciplinary problems.

Applied SciencesVol. 14(23)
Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University (TR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Multi-Criteria Decision Making
3.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.