Comparison of factors affecting the acceptance of the trenchless technology and open-trench method using ANP and AHP: Case study in Iran

Afzali Borujeni, S H; Zare, M and Adelzade Saadabadi, L (2024) Comparison of factors affecting the acceptance of the trenchless technology and open-trench method using ANP and AHP: Case study in Iran. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(1): 04023145, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The rapid growth of population and increasing complexity of urban infrastructure have led to even greater consideration of new methods of installing and commissioning underground facilities. These facilities and vital artery lines are implemented in various ways, the most important of which is the traditional open-trench and new trenchless technology. Many factors affect the selection of the best method of implementation, and the method and technology of implementation should be determined based on the conditions of the project and area of construction. In the present study, the factors affecting the acceptance and application of trenchless technology and open-trench method in Iran are evaluated using two techniques: analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and analytic network process (ANP), and the results are compared with each other. The statistical population for this research consisted of middle managers, contractors, and engineers from Iran's supervision and design body. For this purpose, factors such as technology, economic, environmental, project productivity, organizational, executive management, individual, and demographic are identified as effective factors in the evaluation of excavation technology using library studies and consulting with experts. The relevant decision-making model was then prepared via interviews with experts. Eventually, components and criteria affecting excavation technology were prioritized through pairwise comparisons and model solving. The results showed that, in the AHP technique, the principal components, i.e., economic, technology, and executive management factors, and the criteria section, direct cost, social costs, and competitive business environment factors, are ranked first to third. In the ANP technique, the principal components, i.e., economic, technology, project productivity factors, and in the criteria section, the factors of the competitive business environment, environment, and social costs, are ranked first to third. This comparison shows that the existence of dependencies between the principal components is effective in prioritizing the elements.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: analytic hierarchy process; analytic network process; trenchless technology
Index terms: executive, competitive busines, supervision, analytic network process, implementation, direct cost, case study, prioritizing, productivity, engineer, excavation, commissioning, population, decision-making, complexity, interview, manager, urban infrastructure
Subjects: business management, construction operations, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, profession, control systems, practitioner, demography, decision analysis, decision-making and optimization, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, completion, management, economics
Topics: Site Management, Quality Management, Urban Studies, Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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