IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i22p15828-d1277748.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation Method for Green Construction Demonstration Projects in China Based on G-TOPSIS

Author

Listed:
  • Gangzhu Sun

    (School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Xiaoyue Zhang

    (School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Yadan Yan

    (School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Yao Lu

    (School of Architecture and Engineering, Zhengzhou Business University, Zhengzhou 451200, China)

  • Xiaoqin Zhang

    (School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

Abstract

Although the construction industry has played an important role in promoting national economic growth, over the past decades, construction activities have caused serious negative impacts on the ecological environment. Faced with this challenge, many countries have made promoting the greening of the construction industry one of their development goals. As a high-level demonstration project for green construction, Green Construction Demonstration Projects (GC-DPs) play a significant role in improving the level of green construction and promoting the green development of the construction industry. This study aims to establish a reasonable GC-DP evaluation method to promote the development of green construction in China. An evaluation index system is constructed, including five criterion layers, 20 main factors, and 60 sub-factors. Sixty sub-factors correspond to 60 specific indicators. The combination optimization of subjective and objective weights of indicators is conducted using game theory, and the comprehensive weights of indicators are calculated. Furthermore, a GC-DP evaluation model based on the gray TOPSIS method with game theory combination weights (hereinafter referred to as G-TOPSIS) is established. Finally, a case study is carried out to verify the feasibility of the proposed method. Expert scoring and actual engineering data are used to calculate indicator weights, and game theory is utilized to balance the influence of subjective and objective factors. Results show that the evaluation results obtained using the proposed G-TOPSIS method are consistent with the actual situation of the project.

Suggested Citation

  • Gangzhu Sun & Xiaoyue Zhang & Yadan Yan & Yao Lu & Xiaoqin Zhang, 2023. "Evaluation Method for Green Construction Demonstration Projects in China Based on G-TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15828-:d:1277748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15828/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15828/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. B. Kirubakaran & M. Ilangkumaran, 2016. "Selection of optimum maintenance strategy based on FAHP integrated with GRA–TOPSIS," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 285-313, October.
    2. Mei Liu & Boning Li & Hongjun Cui & Pin-Chao Liao & Yuecheng Huang, 2022. "Research Paradigm of Network Approaches in Construction Safety and Occupational Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-22, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liang, Decui & Fu, Yuanyuan & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2023. "A consensual group ELECTRE-SORT approach considering the incomparable classes with the application of machine maintenance strategy assignment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Seyed Mahmoud Zanjirchi & Mina Rezaeian Abrishami & Negar Jalilian, 2019. "Four decades of fuzzy sets theory in operations management: application of life-cycle, bibliometrics and content analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1289-1309, June.
    3. Hsin-Chieh Wu & Toly Chen & Chin-Hau Huang, 2020. "A Piecewise Linear FGM Approach for Efficient and Accurate FAHP Analysis: Smart Backpack Design as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, August.
    4. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    5. Patanjal Kumar & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Yigit Kazancoglu & Ali Emrouznejad, 2023. "A decision framework for incorporating the coordination and behavioural issues in sustainable supply chains in digital economy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 721-749, July.
    6. Carpitella, Silvia & Mzougui, Ilyas & Benítez, Julio & Carpitella, Fortunato & Certa, Antonella & Izquierdo, Joaquín & La Cascia, Marco, 2021. "A risk evaluation framework for the best maintenance strategy: The case of a marine salt manufacture firm," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Ilya Stepanov & Johan Albrecht, 2019. "Decarbonization And Energy Policy Instruments In The Eu: Does Carbon Pricing Prevail?," HSE Working papers WP BRP 211/EC/2019, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    8. Huifang Sun & Yaoguo Dang & Wenxin Mao, 2018. "A Decision-Making Method with Grey Multi-Source Heterogeneous Data and Its Application in Green Supplier Selection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Hua Shi & Mei-Yun Quan & Hu-Chen Liu & Chun-Yan Duan, 2018. "A Novel Integrated Approach for Green Supplier Selection with Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Uncertain Linguistic Information: A Case Study in the Agri-Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.
    10. Jianjun Wang & Jikun Huo & Shuo Zhang & Yun Teng & Li Li & Taoya Han, 2021. "Flexibility Transformation Decision-Making Evaluation of Coal-Fired Thermal Power Units Deep Peak Shaving in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, February.
    11. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2018. "Optimization of Maintenance in Production and Storage Systems for Domestic Water," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(1), pages 359-380, January.
    12. Abderrahmen Mediouni & Nicolas Zufferey & Nachiappan Subramanian & Naoufel Cheikhrouhou, 2019. "Fit between humanitarian professionals and project requirements: hybrid group decision procedure to reduce uncertainty in decision-making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 471-496, December.
    13. Zhang, Long & Bai, Wuliyasu & Xiao, Huijuan & Ren, Jingzheng, 2021. "Measuring and improving regional energy security: A methodological framework based on both quantitative and qualitative analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    14. Zhong-Zhong Jiang & Na He & Xuwei Qin & Minghe Sun & Pengfei Wang, 2022. "Optimizing production and maintenance for the service-oriented manufacturing supply chain," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 33-58, September.
    15. Mahmood Shafiee & Ashraf Labib & Jhareswar Maiti & Andrew Starr, 2019. "Maintenance strategy selection for multi-component systems using a combined analytic network process and cost-risk criticality model," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(2), pages 89-104, April.
    16. Teng, Sin Yong & Leong, Wei Dong & How, Bing Shen & Lam, Hon Loong & Máša, Vítězslav & Stehlík, Petr, 2021. "Debottlenecking cogeneration systems under process variations: Multi-dimensional bottleneck tree analysis with neural network ensemble," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PB).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15828-:d:1277748. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.