Identifying Strategic Development Objectives for European Union’s Potential Candidate States Using Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach: Case Study of Bosnia and Herzegovina
This research is the second of a series of three
researches to cope with strategic development objectives using Dominance-based
Rough Set Approach (DRSA). The objective of this article is to expose the
results of a research using DRSA to help the European Union (EU) identifying
political, economical, sociological and technological strategic objectives for
potential candidate countries planning to
join the EU. Using the proposed methodology, politicians and leaders will be
able to prioritize strategic development objectives according to political,
economical, sociological and technological (PEST) needs of a specific candidate
country to the EU. More precisely, the proposed methodology classifies all the
European Union’s countries according to the following three different
categories: [A] EU countries that are doing well according to the selected
indicators; [B] EU countries that need support to acquire category A status;
[C] EU countries ranked the lowest and needing special support with
regard to the criterion or criteria considered. The three categories are
delimited by tertiles relative to the average ranking of all EU countries
including a potential candidate country, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Afterwards,
DRSA provides decision rules based on this
classification. These decision rules thus focus on the PEST needs of countries
with respect to improve their development and classification by pointing
out what was needed to be part of the different categories. We strongly believe
that by targeting these identified needs, this research will help the
development of the European Union’s economy, target and prioritize economical
and sociological improvements with the use of strategic objectives for any
candidate country. One of the results concerning our case study with Bosnia and
Herzegovina is about the fact that this potential country has a weakness in the
percentage of women in politics. Indeed, our research as shown that this
criterion has an impact for the overall classification of the EU countries.
References
[1]
Rozenber, O. (2015) Faut-Il continuer à étudier l’Union européenne? Politique Européenne, 50, 296-309.
[2]
Guyader, M. (2007) élargissements et intégration dans l’Union. Politique Etrangère, 2, 367-380. https://doi.org/10.3917/pe.072.0367
[3]
Krulic, J. (2013) Croatie: Une adhésion si longtemps désirée à l’UE, La revue géopolitique.
[4]
Kralj, D. and Markic, M. (2008) Processes Innovation and Sustainable Development. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development, 2, 99-110.
[5]
Pawlak, Z. (1982) Rough Set. International Journal of Parallel Programming, 11, 341-356.
[6]
Pawlak, Z. (1991) Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data. Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3534-4
[7]
Pawlak, Z. and Slowinski, R. (1994) Rough Set Approach to Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 72, 443-459.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90415-4
[8]
Pawlak, Z. (2002) Rough Set Theory and Its Applications. Journal of Telecommunications and Information Theory, 3, 7-10.
[9]
Greco, S., Matarazzo, B. and Slowiński, R. (2001) Rough Sets Theory for Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 129, 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00167-3
[10]
Zaras, K. (2004) Rough Approximation of a Preference Relation by a Multi-Attribute Stochastic Dominance for Deterministic, Stochastic and Fuzzy Evaluation Problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 159, 196-206.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00391-6
[11]
Zaras, K., Marin, J.-C. and Boudreau-Trudel, B. (2012) Dominance Rough Set Approach as a Decision-Making Method for the Selection of Sustainable Development Projects. American Journal of Operational Research, 2, 506.
[12]
Ho, H., Fann, W., Chiang, H., Nguyen, P., Pham, D., Nguyen, P. and Nagai, M. (2016) Application of Rough Set, GSM and MSM to Analyze Learning Outcome—An Example Introduction to Education. Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications, 8, 23-38. https://doi.org/10.4236/jilsa.2016.81003
[13]
Renaud, J., Thibault, J., Lanouette, R., Kiss, L.N., Zaras, K. and Fonteix, C. (2007) Comparison of Two Multi-Criteria Methods: Net Flow and Rough Set Methods for aid to Decision Making in a High Yield Pulping Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 177, 1418-1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.013
[14]
Marin, J., Zaras, K. and Boudreau-Trudel, B. (2014) Use of the Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach as a Decision Aid Tool for the Selection of Development Projects in Northern Quebec. Modern Economy, 5, 723-741.
https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2014.57067
[15]
Prema S. and Umamaheswari, P. (2016) Multitude Classifier Using Rough Set Jelinek-Mercer Naive Bayes for Disease Diagnosis. Circuits and Systems, 7, 701-708.
https://doi.org/10.4236/cs.2016.76059
[16]
Songbian Z. (2016) Business Intelligence from Customer Review Management Using Rough Set Model. International Journal of Advanced Research, 4, 816-824.
[17]
Emam, O., Farhan, M. and Abohany, A. (2017) Faults Repairing Analysis Using Rough Sets after Implementation of Labor Force Redistribution Algorithm: A Case Study in Telecom Egypt. Information Sciences Letter, 6, 39-48.
[18]
World Bank (2018) Indicators.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator
[19]
United Nations (2018) UN Data.
http://data.un.org/Explorer.aspx?d=UNODC
[20]
International Institute for Strategic Studies (2018) IISS.
https://www.iiss.org
[21]
Marin, J., Trudel, B. and Zaras, K. (2018) Identifying Strategic Development Objectives for African Countries Using Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach: The Povertry String Theory. Modern Economy, 9, 1262-1286.
https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2018.97082
[22]
Greco, S., Matarazzo, B. and Slowinski, R. (1999) The Use of Rough Sets and Fuzzy Sets in MCDM. In: Gal, T., Hanne, T. and Stewart, T., Eds., Advances in Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, 14.1-14.59.
[23]
Cartograf (2018) Carte de l’Europe.
https://www.cartograf.fr/carte_europe.php