A theoretical framework for developing the mau model to determine the most appropriate use for historic buildings

Sharifi, A A and Farahinia, A H (2023) A theoretical framework for developing the mau model to determine the most appropriate use for historic buildings. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(1), pp. 238-258. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: This study is to develop an accurate assessment tool to identify the factors that may influence determining the appropriate use for historic buildings. Design/methodology/approach: The research method in this study is qualitative. The integrated MCDM (multi-criteria decision-making) method is used to determine the most appropriate use for historic buildings, which ultimately led to the development of the MAU (most appropriate use) model. Findings: The results of this study show that, in terms of preserving identity and cultural heritage, the role intangible criteria have to play is seemingly more important than that of tangible criteria. Also, weighted criteria in the matrix relating the “use” options demonstrate cultural-social, commercial and educational uses being apparently more important than other uses. Originality/value: The novelty of this research is in providing a framework to facilitate contribution to determine the most suitable use for historic buildings with the ability to set criteria and separate weights for each building aiming to increase the useful life to the maximum extent and delaying the need for a subsequent major overhaul.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: fuzzy Delphi method; historic buildings; mau model; multi-criteria decision-making
Index terms: methodology, multi-criteria decision-making, historic building, identity, fuzzy Delphi, option
Subjects: decision analysis, sociology, decision-making and optimization, research methods, construction type
Topics: Research Practice, Construction Technology, Risk Management
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