Environmental and Climate Technologies

2020, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 135–144

https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2020-0092
https://content.sciendo.com

Fish Processing Efficiency Ranking

Zane INDZERE1 *, Dagnija BLUMBERGA2
1, 2 Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes iela 12/1, Riga,
LV-1048, Latvia

Abstract – Fish as food has been widely used, and as its consumption is increasing, the
efficiency of fish production companies needs to be increased as well. Fish production may
consist of many processes, depending on the type of fish products they produce. Based on this,
the increase in the efficiency of the whole company could be expensive, especially for small
size companies, whose revenues per year are rather small. Therefore, to evaluate and
understand which part of the company is the least efficient and needs to be improved first to
have the highest increase in the efficiency of the company, the decision making method needs
to be used for the evaluation. In this research, the method MULTIMOORA was chosen to
evaluate the specific company’s production efficiency. The results have shown that fish
preliminary processing is the least efficient process for the chosen case study.
Recommendations for improvement the efficiency of the least efficient stage have been
developed, therefore improving the efficiency for the whole company.

Keywords – Canning; fish; multi-criteria decision making method; MULTIMOORA;

processing; product; production

1. INTRODUCTION
Fish as a food has become one of the main food resources for human beings. Based on the
available data on the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), it is
stated that in 2016 the apparent consumption of fisheries and aquaculture products was
20.3 kg per capita per year. Moreover, the consumption of these products within last six years
has increased by almost 9 % (see Fig. 1) [1].
21
Consumption of fish,

20
kg/capita/year

19

18

17
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Year
Fig. 1. Fish consumption per capita per year [1].

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zane.indzere@rtu.lv
©2020 Zane Indzere, Dagnija Blumberga.
This is an open access article licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ 135
licenses/by/4.0), in the manner agreed with Sciendo.
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24
These numbers are even higher when the situation in Europe is shown. Some European
countries consume way larger amount of fish than the average consumption mentioned by
FAO, for example, the fish consumption in Portugal is 55.9 kg/capita/year which is twice as
more than the average consumption per capita; also citizens in Spain consumes high amount
of fish – 45.2 kg/capita/year; in Latvia – 26.3 kg/capita/year in 2015. Also, the average
consumption of fish and aquaculture products is higher in Europe – 25.1 kg/capita/year [2].
Not only consumption, but also the fishing sector including fishing and fish processing is
developed and has essential importance within the fishery industry – in European Union
5.3 million tonnes of fish have been caught in 2016 [3].
The increased consumption of fish and the growing number of people is leading to even
higher amount of fish consumption in the future. This means that it will be necessary to
increase the technological load in the fish processing companies to meet the needs of the
growing population. These dynamic changes are pushing fish industry to increase the
efficiency within the fish processing companies, therefore decreasing the negative impact on
environment while maintaining their productivity [4]. However, fish catching and its
harvesting are topics that still needs to be highly considered.
The improvements in the production processes are also important due to competiveness,
and sustainability challenges that the industry is facing now. One of the sustainability
challenges are created due to the fact that the fish production is a source for several
environmental issues because of high energy consumption, use of high amount of water,
therefore also creating great amount of wastewater, waste, as well as noise, and odour [5].
The environmental problems are caused from the various technologies and processes that are
used in fish production stages, for example, smoking, frying, cooking, boiling and drying of
fish consumes high amount of energy. The high amount of energy is also needed to freeze the
fish and keep it frozen. Terehovics et al. researched how freezing processes in the fish
production could be improved. One of the main conclusion was that the specific energy
consumption needed to freeze the fish was lower than that needed to maintain their frozen
state [6]. This could lead to some suggestions for improvement in the efficiency of the
company, for example, to buy more fresh fish and less already frozen fish, decrease the
amount of time fish stays frozen etc. Other important fish processing part – washing –
consumes a great amount of water and is creating the same amount of wastewater (or
sometimes even more, because in some parts the water from fish is also going to wastewater).
In the first production stages where the fish is being processed to prepare the main product, a
considerable amount of waste is created due to the grading, dehulling, destemming/destalking
and trimming, cutting, chopping processes. Jayasinghe and Hawboldt analysed that the
production of biofuel from oil from fish waste could have environmental and economic
benefits, considering that 50 % of the initial fish weight becomes a waste within fish
processing [7]. Also, additional energy and resources are needed to manage material handling
and storage, sterilization, and other processes that are needed to maintain fish production
processes in order.
Table 1 gathers information regarding various processes and stages from fish processing
companies that indicates the specific energy consumption, water consumption and created
amount of wastewater per tonne of fresh fish. The data was conducted considering the best
available technologies (BAT) [5].

136
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24
TABLE 1. BREF DATA FOR FISH PROCESSING COMPANIES [5]
Energy consumption, Wastewater,
kWh/t fish m3/t fish
Frozen fish thawing NI 5
Grinding 0.8–1.2 1
White fish filleting 65–87 (including ice, freezing and filleting) 5–11
Unloading of fish 3 2–5
Freezing and storage 10–14 NI
Deheading of white fish 0.3–0.8 NI

The main fish processing processes in Latvia are salting, freezing, smoking, producing of
non-sterilised and sterilised canned fish food [8]. In 2017 the total fish products were
55400 tonnes, where the highest share of the products was chilled, frozen fish and filleted
fish – 20.9 %, and canned food from sprats, sardines and sardinella – 15.3 % [9].
The aim of this paper is to understand and evaluate how to increase the efficiency of the
fish production process, choosing from several alternatives just one – the least efficient one
in the company. It was decided to use method MULTIMOORA as the most suitable for this
research and the set goal. In this way the company’s efficiency will be improved, therefore
achieving the best result with limited resources.

2. METHODOLOGY
Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis (MULTIMOORA) was used
as a research method to evaluate the alternative improvements, considering various parts of
the production processes in order to increase the efficiency of fish production companies.
The current state of the company that is the main research object requires improvements in
the production process, including technologies and management of the resources. However,
the company does not have enough financial resources to implement all the necessary
improvements at the same time, therefore, the multi-criteria decision making method was
used to evaluate which alternative would be the most essential to be improved first in the
specific fish production company.
The full version of MULTIMOORA was first introduced in 2010 by Brauers and
Zavadskas [10]. This method summarizes MOORA method (including ratio system and
reference point), and the full multiplicative form method. This method was chosen to be used
in this study in order to obtain the results that are based not only on one approach, but that
also considers the results from three distinct approaches. The Fig. 2 shows basic steps needed
to obtain the results for the method MULTIMOORA.

137
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24

The ratio system

The
The reference point
Multi-decision MULTIMOORA
approach
making matrix method
MOORA

The full
multiplicative form

MULTI

Fig. 2. Steps of MULTIMOORA method [11].

2.1. Examples of MULTIMOORA Case Study

MULTIMOORA method is used when the decision needs to be made in favour of one of
several alternatives. The method MULTIMOORA was used to evaluate several projects by
considering payback time, net present value, internal rate of return and other criteria that
needs to be considered before the project implementation. In the initial evaluation, project A
was the best option considering the government income, but project B – for the increase in
employment, and project C was somewhere in between of both previous alternatives.
Therefore, in this case, to understand which alternative is better and which project to
implement, method MULTIMOORA was used. As the result of the method, project A was
considered to be the best alternative [10].
In the research [11], authors used the method MULTIMOORA to choose the most suitable
laptop for the office work where the decision makers were workers themselves. In the result
of performed method, the most suitable laptop was chosen, considering the necessary
computer parameters needed for the office work [11].

2.2. MOORA: Ratio System

The description of the method comes from the authors of the method – Brauers and
Zavadskas – when it was introduced to others for the first time, firstly method MOORA [12]
in 2006 and MULTIMOORA (MOORA combined with full-multiplicative form) in 2010 [11].
Firstly, the decision-making matrix, where the alternatives and criteria are chosen,
the matrix shows the performance of several alternatives with respect to the criteria.
The evaluation can be done by using the measurement scales, or actual parameters
(for example, cost, lifetime etc.), however, in those cases pairwise comparison is needed [12].
The weights for criteria are neither used in the original, nor in this study in order to decrease
the subjections in the evaluation, however, in some cases weight can be added to
MULTIMOORA method if necessary [12].
When the decision-making matrix has been done, the further step is to normalize the values
of alternatives in the matrix by using Eq. (1):

138
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24

xij
x*ij = , (1)
2
∑ in=1 xij

where
xij – the response of alternative j to objective i;
x*ij – dimensionless number representing the normalized response of alternative j to objective i
(in an interval [0;1]);
i = 1, 2, …, n;
j = 1, 2, …, m.
Next, the optimization needs to be performed. For this case, the criteria are divided into
two groups: beneficial (criteria that need to be maximized) and non-beneficial (criteria that
need to be minimized). Then, the sum of non-beneficial parameters is subtracted from the
sum of beneficial parameters as shown in Eq. (2):
i= g i =n
y *j = ∑ xij* − ∑ xij* , (2)
i =1 i = g +1

where
i = 1, 2, ..., g – the objectives to be maximized;
i = g + 1, g + 2, ..., n – the objectives to be minimized;
yj∗ – normalized assessment of alternative j with respect to all objectives.
Then the sum for each alternative is calculated and an ordinal ranking in ascending order
of the yj* shows the final preference of this method, achieving the final evaluation of the first
method.

2.3. MOORA: Reference Point Theory

The second part of Moora is called the Reference Point Theory. This method starts with
already normalized values that have been obtained from Eq. (1). Next step involves finding
the maximal value for each criterion, and then subtract each value from the maximal value as
shown by Eq. (3):
 
 
min max ri − xij*
( j) (i )
, (3)
 

where ri is the ith co-ordinate of the maximal objective reference point.

Again, the ordinary ranking is done, however in this case – in descending order. This is the
final step to be performed of MOORA method, achieving the results of the second method.

2.4. Full-Multiplicative Form

Full-multiplicative form is the third and the last method performed in MULTIMOORA.
This method uses the decision-making matrix that is made by decision makers in the
beginning. To achieve utility of alternative, this method considers beneficial and
non-beneficial criteria; therefore, non-beneficial criterion is used as denominators as seen in
Eq. (4):

139
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24
i
∏ x gi
g =1
U 'j = n , (4)
∏ xkj
k = i +1

where
i – number of objectives to be maximized;
n – number of objectives to be minimized;
U’j – utility of alternative j with objectives to be maximized and objectives to be minimized.
Then the ranking of alternatives is done in ascending order based on the results of Eq. (4).
This is the last step to be performed to obtain the missing ranking of MULTIMOORA method.

2.5. MULTIMOORA
MULTIMOORA considers results from all three methods – ratio system, reference point
theory and full-multiplicative form. Each of the method as a result achieves ranking that is
finally combined together to achieve the final ranking – the ranking of MULTIMOORA.

2.6. Case Study

A specific fish processing plant data was used to perform MULTIMOORA method in order
to evaluate the efficiency of current processing processes. Knowing the fact that the
production plant is too large and too much investments would be needed to improve
everything; the first improvements are needed where the efficiency is the lowest. Therefore,
the method MULTIMOORA is used to conduct the least efficient process of this specific
production plant.
The evaluation was done for two production stages (alternatives) based on the division
mentioned in BAT document (see Fig. 3):
− Preliminary processing;
− Preservation methods.
Preliminary processing

Unloading Sorting Gutting Skinning

Filling in Adding Closing of Washing of

Pre-cooking Draining Sterilisation
cans additives cans cans

Preservation method – canning

Fig. 3. Fish production stages.

As discussed before, the fish processing plant uses a high volume of resources and
contributes to global environmental problems by consuming energy, water and producing
wastewater and waste – all these indicators are used as objectives in the evaluation.
Two alternatives have been chosen for the research in respect to four indicators.
The measurement units used for the indicators are collected and calculated per 1000 kg fresh

140
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24
fish (see Table 2). The data shown in Table 1 is also the first step of MULTIMOORA –
decision-making matrix.
TABLE 2. CASE STUDY DATA – DECISION-MAKING MATRIX
Energy consumption, Wastewater, Water, Waste,
kWh/tfish m3/tfish m3/tfish kg/tfish
Preliminary processing 4.06 15.97 15.97 314.92
Preservation methods 133.28 2.77 2.77 24.73

The particular alternatives (preliminary processing and preservation methods) where

chosen based on the production processes stages. In this production plant, the improvements
are needed in order to increase the efficiency of the company, however, based on the data,
neither of the criteria seem to be standing out. For example, in preliminary processing the
consumption of water and wastewater amount, and waste is a lot higher than in preservation
methods, however, in the other case the consumption of energy is very high.
In this case, to gain the knowledge which of two alternatives has the lowest efficiency and
therefore needs to be improved first, multi-criteria decision making methods can be used,
more specifically – MULTIMOORA method is used on this research.

3. RESULTS
Table 2 shows the necessary input data for MULTIMOORA method, the first step is to
calculate the ratio system. The first part of the calculation steps is seen in Table 3, where the
squares, the sum of the squares and their square roots are being calculated.
TABLE 3. RATIO SYSTEM – PART 1
Energy consumption Wastewater Water Waste
Square Preliminary processing 16.4836 255.0409 255.0409 99174.6064
Preservation methods 82277.1856 8.7616 7.6729 14970.0061
Sum 41354.98 82293.67 263.80 262.71
Root 203.36 286.87 16.24 16.21

Table 4 shows the second part of the Ratio system method, where the objectives are divided
by their square roots (described in the Eq. (1)). Then, the sum of each alternative in respect
to all criteria are being calculated. Based on the results of the sum, the ranking is done in
descending order.
TABLE 4. RATIO SYSTEM – PART 2

Energy consumption Wastewater Water Waste Sum Rank

Preliminary processing 0.01 0.98 0.99 0.93 2.91 1

Preservation methods 1.00 0.18 0.17 0.36 1.72 2

The second part of MOORA method is to calculate the reference point. First, the maximal
value of each criterion is conducted, and then, by using Eq. (3), the deviation from the
maximal value is calculated. Then, the maximal value of calculated values of the alternatives

141
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24
are found. The last step to perform is to rank the achieved results in the ascending order
(Table 5).
TABLE 5. THE REFERENCE POINT PART OF MOORA
Max value 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.93 1.00 0.98

Deviation from the Preliminary processing 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.00
reference point Preservation methods 0.00 0.80 0.81 0.57 0.00 0.80

To achieve the results for the full multiplicative form, Eq. (6) is used. In this case, all
indicators are non-beneficial and need to be minimized, however, there are no criteria to be
maximized, this is why all the criteria are used as multipliers in Eq. (6), but not as
denominators. In Table 6, the last column shows the ranking based on the results conducted
from the final results – penultimate column.
TABLE 6. THE FULL MULTIPLICATIVE FORM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Energy
Wastewater 3=1·2 Water 5=3·4 Waste 7=5·6 Rank
consumption
Preliminary 4.06 15.97 64.84 15.97 1035.47 314.92 4.06 1
processing
Preservation 286.84 2.96 849.05 2.77 2351.86 122.35 286.84 2
methods

Finally, all the three methods and all the results have been covered, as well the final result
of MULTIMOORA method can be seen in Fig. 4 – the score shows efficiency, therefore, the
higher the score is, the higher the efficiency in the specific product part is compared to the
processes in the production company.
6.00

5.00
Efficiency score

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
Preliminary processing Preservation methods

Ratio system The reference point Multi

Fig. 4. The results of MULTIMOORA method.

The results showed that between two fish production stages namely preliminary processing
that includes the processing of fish to prepare it to make a specific product and preservation
method where the product is made (in this case – canning), the least efficient alternative is
preliminary processing, although the second alternative has been evaluated one slightly
higher.

142
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24

4. DISCUSSION
The results have shown that the process where the fish is preliminary processed needs to be
improved to achieve the best efficiency improvements. This stage of production includes the
following processes: unloading, sorting, gutting, and skinning.
Based on the results of MULTIMOORA method, the improvements for specific production
stage have been defined, and they are as follows:
− To use water in a more efficient way, nozzles and solenoid shut-off valve can be
installed, therefore, decreasing the water consumption by 50 %;
− Wastewater can be reused for the floor washing;
− The large amount of waste is being created in this stage, and even though it is
impossible to avoid the waste, it can be used in a more useful way. One of the
possibilities is to ferment it and then use as animal feed. Production of fish flour is
another possible option. In this way waste is no longer waste but a resource that can
be used for useful and high value added products;
− Based on the suggestions mentioned in BAT document, the improvements for this stage
is to reduce the total amount of waste, the separation of residues can be used. Due to
this method, the consumption of water is reduced (European Commission, 2018).
It also needs to be considered that while improving processes in one stage, the efficiency
in other processes may also increase, for example, if the wastewater that does not contain any
chemicals is reused for washing, then the water will be collected also from the wastewater
that is created during preservation method performance, reducing the amount of total
consumed water for cleaning due to the reused water from both production stages.

5. CONCLUSIONS
The method MULTIMOORA was used to evaluate two production stages at a specific fish
processing company. The aim of the method was to find which of the two alternatives is the
most inefficient and should be improved first to gain the highest improvement in the
efficiency of the company, considering that most companies to not have enough financial
resources to improve the efficiency in all the inefficient places.
The results showed that the process where the fish is preliminary processed is the most
inefficient in the production. Within this process, the high amount of waste is produced, as
well as the consumed water and the produced amount of wastewater is high, therefore four
suggestions were made based on BAT and researchers of this paper.
The method MULTIMOORA can also be used to evaluate efficiency and compare various
fish preservation methods such as salting, smoking, and drying in order to make
improvements where they are needed the most. The method can be used to compare the results
from different fish processing companies that may use similar processing and preservation
methods and to compare results, therefore finding possible improvements, where the
indicators of resources are higher than they are for another company.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research is funded by European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, project “Improving production efficiency in the fish
processing companies”.

143
 Environmental and Climate Technologies
____________________________________________________________________________ 2020 / 24

REFERENCES
[1] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The state of the world fisheries and aquaculture. [Online]
[Accessed: 20.11.2019]. Available: http://www.fao.org/state-of-fisheries-aquaculture
[2] European Commission. Fisheries. [Online] [Accessed: 02.12.2019]. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/6-consumption_en
[3] Eurostat. Statistical books. The EU in the world. 2018 edition.
[4] Terehovics E., Veidenbergs I., Blumberga D. Analysis of Operation Parameters of Fish Refrigeration by Exergy
Analysis. Case Study. Environmental and Climate Technologies 2019:23(1):229–241.
https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2019-0015
[5] European Commission. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control. Reference Document on Best Available
Techniques in the Food, Drink and Milk Industries. Final draft, 2018. https://doi.org/10.2760/243911
[6] Terehovics E., Veidenbergs I., Blumberga D. Parameters that Affect Electricity Consumption in Fish Freezing. Case
Study. Environmental and Climate Technologies 2019:23(3):15–25. https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2019-0076
[7] Jayasinghe P., Hawboldt K. A review of bio-oils from waste biomass: Focus on fish processing waste. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2012:16(1):798–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.09.005
[8] Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Latvia. Fishing sector in Latvia. [Online] [Accessed: 18.12.2019]. Available:
https://www.zm.gov.lv/zivsaimnieciba/statiskas-lapas/zivju-apstrade/apstrade?nid=744#jump (in Latvian)
[9] Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Latvia. Sales of fish products. [Online] [Accessed: 18.12.2019]. Available:
https://www.zm.gov.lv/zivsaimnieciba/statiskas-lapas/zivju-apstrade/sarazotas-zivju-produkcijas-
realizacija?nid=745#jumpb (in Latvian)
[10] Brauers W. K. M., Zavadskas E. K. Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies.
Technological and Economic Development of Economy 2010:16(1):5–24. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.01
[11] Adalı E. A., Işık A. T. The multi-objective decision making methods based on MULTIMOORA and MOOSRA for the
laptop selection problem. Journal of Industrial Engineering International 2017:13(2):229–237.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40092-016-0175-5
[12] Brauers W. K., Zavadskas E. K. The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy.
Control and Cybernetics 2006:35:445–469.

144