Eghbali-Zarch, M; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R; Dehghan-Sanej, K and Kaboli, A (2022) Prioritizing the effective strategies for construction and demolition waste management using fuzzy idocriw and waspas methods. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(3), pp. 1109-1138. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The construction industry is a key driver of economic growth. However, the adverse impacts of construction and demolition waste (CDW) resulted from the active construction projects on the economy, environment, public health and social life necessitates an appropriate control and management of this waste stream. Developing and promoting the construction and demolition waste management (CDWM) hierarchy program at the strategic level is essential. Design/methodology/approach: This study aims to propose a hybrid decision model that hybridizes the Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights (IDOCRIW) and weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) under a fuzzy environment. Findings: The proposed method ranks the potential strategic alternatives by the sustainable development criteria to improve the performance of CDWM. As indicated in the results, the fuzzy approach in the decision-making process enables the transformation of linguistic variables into fuzzy numbers that show uncertainty and ambiguity in real-world systems. Moreover, the close correlation between the final ranking of the proposed methodology and the average priority order of the strategic alternatives obtained by five different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods implies the validity of the model performance. Practical implications: This proposed model is an appropriate tool to effectively decide on the development of CDWM from a strategic point of view. It aims to establish an MCDM framework for the evaluation of effective strategies for CDWM according to the indices of sustainable development. Implementing proper operational plans and conducting research in CDWM has the highest priority, and enacting new and more stringent laws, rules and regulations against the production of CDW has secondary priority. This study contributes to the field by optimizing the CDWM by applying the top-priority strategies resulted from the proposed fuzzy hybrid MCDM methodology by the decision-makers or policy-makers to reach the best managerial strategic plan. Originality/value: In the proposed methodology, the IDOCRIW technique is utilized and updated with the triangular fuzzy numbers for the first time in the literature to derive the weights of sustainable development criteria. The fuzzy WASPAS method is utilized for evaluation and providing a final ranking of the strategic alternatives.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction and demolition waste management; idocriw; multi-criteria decision-making; strategic analysis; uncertainty; waspas |
| Index terms: | waste management, regulation, stream, construction project, program, methodology, construction and demolition, strategy, sustainable development, multi-criteria decision-making, strategic analysis, economic growth, construction industry, validity, transformation, public health, decision-making process, prioritizing |
| Subjects: | waste management, business, evaluation and assessment methods, political science, environmental health, industry analysis, decision analysis, health safety and environment, water management, production management, research methods, software systems, economic development, management |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Governance, Risk Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here