Reddy, A S; Kumar, P R and Raj, P A (2022) Entropy-based fuzzy TOPSIS framework for selection of a sustainable building material. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(7), pp. 1194-1205. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Selecting the best material among a pool of alternatives to achieve sustainability is a crucial exercise involving subjectivity. Choosing an alternative considering multiple conflicting criteria involved with multiple decision makers is Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem. The present study utilizes the concept of Shannon’s Entropy in evaluating the objective weight of the criteria, while the subjective weight involved with vagueness and uncertainty is resolved using linguistic variables assigned with trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. The purpose of the study is to integrate the objective and subjective weights of criteria in choosing the best material alternative and to prioritize using Fuzzy TOPSIS. To understand the proposed approach and demonstrate the results of the problem applicability, the study has identified 10 influencing criteria for selection of a binder material alternative. From the findings, it was observed that the criteria 'Practicability& Flexibility', 'Global warming Potential' and 'Resource consumption' were mainly influencing the material selection. Among the five alternatives selected for the study, flyash based PPC has achieved better sustainable performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | entropy; fuzzy TOPSIS; multi-criteria decision making; sustainability; trapezoidal fuzzy number |
| Index terms: | global warming, PPC, subjectivity, resource consumption, entropy, exercise, fuzzy topsis, sustainable building material, decision-making |
| Subjects: | human factors and perception, sustainable materials, health behaviours and lifestyles, decision analysis, environmental resource management, standard forms of contract, decision-making and optimization, climate science, thermal systems |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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