A systematic review of the applications of multi-criteria decision-making methods in site selection problems

Yap, J Y L; Ho, C C and Ting, C Y (2019) A systematic review of the applications of multi-criteria decision-making methods in site selection problems. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 9(4), pp. 548-563. ISSN 2044-124X

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to perform a systematic review on the application of different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods in solving the site selection problem across multiple problem domains. The domains are energy generation, logistics, public services and retail facilities. This study aims to answer the following research questions: Which evaluating criteria were used for each site selection problem domain? Which MCDM methods were frequently applied in a particular site selection problem domain? Design/methodology/approach: The goals of the systematic review were to identify the evaluating criteria as well as the MCDM method used for each problem domain. A total of 81 recent papers (2014–2018) including 32 papers published in conference proceedings and 49 journal articles from various databases including IEEE Xplore, PubMed, Springer, Taylor and Francis as well as ScienceDirect were evaluated. Findings: This study has shown that site selection for energy generation facilities is the most active site selection problem domain, and that the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method is the most commonly used MCDM method for site selection. For energy generation, the criteria which were most used were geographical elements, land use, cost and environmental impact. For logistics, frequently used criteria were geographical elements and distance, while for public services population density, supply and demand, geographical layout and cost were the criteria most used. Criteria useful for retail facilities were the size (space) of the store, demographics of the site, the site characteristics and rental of the site (cost). Research limitations/implications: This study is limited to reviewing papers which were published in the years 2014–2018 only, and only covers the domains of energy generation, logistics, public services and retail facilities. Practical implications: MCDM is a viable tool to be used for solving the site selection problem across the domains of energy generation, logistics, public services and retail facilities. The usage of MCDM continues to be relevant as a complement to machine learning, even as data originating from embedded IoT devices in built environments becomes increasingly Big Data like. Originality/value: Previous systematic review studies for MDCM and built environments have either focused on studying the MCDM techniques itself, or have focused on the application of MCDM for site selection in a single problem domain. In this study, a critical review of MCDM techniques used for site selection as well as the critical criteria used during the MCDM process of site selection was performed on four different built environment domains.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: analytical hierarchy process; electre; energy generation; logistics; multi-criteria decision-making; promthee; public service; retail; site selection; topsis
Index terms: conference, multi-criteria decision-making, machine learning, topsis, density, land use, environmental impact, big data, database, supply and demand, methodology, site selection, systematic literature review, population, public services, demographics, journal, built environment, analytical hierarchy process
Subjects: research methods, administrative law, environmental impact, artificial intelligence, real estate economics, analytical methods, data management, information systems, decision-making and optimization, cognitive psychology, demography, market analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, research evaluation and metrics, decision analysis, research dissemination and communication
Topics: Urban Studies, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Legal Issues, Sustainability
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