Alac, R; Hammad, A W A; Hadigheh, A and Opdyke, A (2025) A multi-criteria approach to egress location selection in buildings: Integrating economic, technical and social factors. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(12), pp. 8304-8325. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to introduce an innovative decision-making framework designed to optimize egress location selection in buildings, significantly enhancing safety during emergencies. By integrating social, economic and technical criteria through the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP), this framework effectively manages the uncertainties inherent in emergency scenarios, providing a robust tool for safeguarding lives and property. Design/methodology/approach – The proposed methodology employs the F-AHP to systematically integrate and evaluate social, economic and technical criteria for egress location selection. A comprehensive case study conducted on a one-story school building demonstrates this approach's practical application and effectiveness. Findings – The analysis reveals that economic criteria are the most significant in determining the optimal egress location, constituting 61.9% of the overall weight, followed by technical criteria at 26.8% and social criteria at 11.3%. The findings highlight the practical application and effectiveness of the proposed approach in addressing uncertainties and optimizing egress location selection. Integrating social, economic and technical considerations gives decision-makers a robust tool to optimize safety, cost-effectiveness and evacuation efficiency. Practical implications – The findings underscore the practical benefits and effectiveness of the proposed approach in managing uncertainties and improving the selection of optimal egress locations. Integrating social, economic and technical considerations gives decision-makers a robust tool to optimize safety, cost-effectiveness and evacuation efficiency. This approach equips practitioners with a comprehensive framework for enhancing emergency preparedness and resilience in various building scenarios. Originality/value – This research introduces a novel framework for egress location selection that addresses the limitations of existing studies by integrating multiple criteria – social, economic and technical – into a cohesive decision-making process. Using the F-AHP in a case study illustrates the framework's practicality and adaptability, providing a dynamic solution that enhances the overall effectiveness of emergency plans. By prioritizing safety, cost-effectiveness and efficiency, this framework ensures that emergency plans are robust and adaptable, thereby significantly enhancing resilience in the face of emergencies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | egress location; evacuation planning; fuzzy analytic hierarchy process; multi-criteria decision-making |
| Index terms: | social factor, decision-making process, case study, prioritizing, efficiency, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, effectiveness, face, emergency preparedness, multi-criteria decision-making, cost-effectivenes, practitioner, adaptability, school building, methodology, decision-making |
| Subjects: | practitioner, user focus, construction type, psychology, research methods, decision-making and optimization, data collection methods, economics, performance management, safety engineering, sociology, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Cost Management, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Health and Safety, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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