IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitdm/v12y2013i01ns021962201350003x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Model Based On Aras-G And Ahp Methods For Multiple Criteria Prioritizing Of Heritage Value

Author

Listed:
  • ZENONAS TURSKIS

    (Department of Construction Technology and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223, Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • EDMUNDAS KAZIMIERAS ZAVADSKAS

    (Department of Construction Technology and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223, Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • VLADISLAVAS KUTUT

    (Department of Construction Technology and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223, Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

The paper discusses the meaning and nature of urban cultural heritage, and the available methods for its valuation in the perspective of sustainable city development. From this perspective, decision-making problems of renovation often involve a complex decision-making process in which multiple requirements and conditions have to be taken into consideration simultaneously. In project development it is hardly possible to get exhaustive and accurate information. As a result, the situations occur, the consequences of which can be very damaging to the project. Sometimes the loss is related to symbolic values that the public perceive as disregarded by the project, despite the overall improved conditions. This paper presents the multiple criteria assessment of alternatives of the cultural heritage renovation projects in Vilnius city. The model consists of the following elements: determining attributes set affecting built and human environment renovation; information collection and analysis, decision modeling and solution selection. The main purpose of the model is to improve the condition of the built and human environment through efficient decision making in renovation supported by multiple attribute evaluation. Delphi, AHP and ARAS-G methods, considering different environment factors as well as stakeholders' needs, are applied to solve problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Zenonas Turskis & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Vladislavas Kutut, 2013. "A Model Based On Aras-G And Ahp Methods For Multiple Criteria Prioritizing Of Heritage Value," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(01), pages 45-73.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:12:y:2013:i:01:n:s021962201350003x
    DOI: 10.1142/S021962201350003X
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S021962201350003X
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S021962201350003X?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Saeed Nosratabadi & Gergo Pinter & Amir Mosavi & Sandor Semperger, 2020. "Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Abbas Mardani & Zenonas Turskis & Ahmad Jusoh & Khalil MD Nor, 2016. "Development of TOPSIS Method to Solve Complicated Decision-Making Problems — An Overview on Developments from 2000 to 2015," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 645-682, May.
    3. Bärbel Held, 2014. "Valuation Model Of Heritage Assets In A Public Museum – A Transdisciplinary Approach," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 5(4), pages 139-168, December.
    4. Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Mehrdad Estiri & Mahshid Janmohammadi & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "A novel advertising media selection framework for online games in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 13(1), pages 109-150, March.
    5. Saeed Nosratabadi & Gergo Pinter & Amir Mosavi & Sandor Semperger, 2020. "Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models," Papers 2003.13423, arXiv.org.
    6. Seyit Ali Erdogan & Jonas Šaparauskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model to Choose the Best Option for Sustainable Construction Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Małgorzata Fedorczak-Cisak & Alicja Kowalska-Koczwara & Filip Pachla & Elżbieta Radziszewska-Zielina & Bartłomiej Szewczyk & Grzegorz Śladowski & Tadeusz Tatara, 2020. "Fuzzy Model for Selecting a Form of Use Alternative for a Historic Building to be Subjected to Adaptive Reuse," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, June.
    8. Amel Ennaceur & Zied Elouedi & Eric Lefevre, 2016. "Belief AHP Method — AHP Method with the Belief Function Framework," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 553-573, May.
    9. Bahadir Fatih Yildirim & Burcu Adiguzel Mercangoz, 2020. "Evaluating the logistics performance of OECD countries by using fuzzy AHP and ARAS-G," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 10(1), pages 27-45, March.
    10. Dušan M. Milošević & Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2020. "Implementation of Adjusted Fuzzy AHP Method in the Assessment for Reuse of Industrial Buildings," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-24, October.
    11. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Hamideh Asadi & Gholamreza Shams & Jolanta Tamošaitienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2021. "Model for the Sustainable Material Selection by Applying Integrated Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    12. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    13. Marta Dell’Ovo & Federico Dell’Anna & Raffaella Simonelli & Leopoldo Sdino, 2021. "Enhancing the Cultural Heritage through Adaptive Reuse. A Multicriteria Approach to Evaluate the Castello Visconteo in Cusago (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    14. Pan Jiang & Long Shao & Christopher Baas, 2019. "Interpretation of Value Advantage and Sustainable Tourism Development for Railway Heritage in China Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-17, November.

    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. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    2. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Kaveh Madani & Laura Read & Laleh Shalikarian, 2014. "Voting Under Uncertainty: A Stochastic Framework for Analyzing Group Decision Making Problems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(7), pages 1839-1856, May.
    4. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    5. Haurant, P. & Oberti, P. & Muselli, M., 2011. "Multicriteria selection aiding related to photovoltaic plants on farming fields on Corsica island: A real case study using the ELECTRE outranking framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 676-688, February.
    6. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    7. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    8. Morgenroth, Edgar & FitzGerald, John & FitzGerald, John, 2006. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Morgenroth, Edgar (ed.),Ex-Ante Evaluation of the Investment Priorities for the National Development Plan 2007-2013, chapter 24, pages 317-333, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
      • Baker, Terence J. & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick, 1996. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Baker, Terence J. (ed.),Economic Implications for Ireland of EMU, chapter 12, pages 339-352, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    9. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2010. "Handling multicriteria preferences in cluster analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 819-827, May.
    10. Pawel Lezanski & Maria Pilacinska, 2018. "The dominance-based rough set approach to cylindrical plunge grinding process diagnosis," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 989-1004, June.
    11. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    12. Roszkowska, Ewa & Wachowicz, Tomasz, 2015. "Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 920-932.
    13. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    14. Amir Noori & Hossein Bonakdari & Khosro Morovati & Bahram Gharabaghi, 2018. "The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 471-488, December.
    15. Roy, Bernard & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Handling effects of reinforced preference and counter-veto in credibility of outranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 185-190, July.
    16. Rubio-Aliaga, Alvaro & García-Cascales, M. Socorro & Sánchez-Lozano, Juan Miguel & Molina-Garcia, Angel, 2021. "MCDM-based multidimensional approach for selection of optimal groundwater pumping systems: Design and case example," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 213-224.
    17. Catrinu, M.D. & Nordgård, D.E., 2011. "Integrating risk analysis and multi-criteria decision support under uncertainty in electricity distribution system asset management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(6), pages 663-670.
    18. Manley, Dawn K. & Hines, Valerie A. & Jordan, Matthew W. & Stoltz, Ronald E., 2013. "A survey of energy policy priorities in the United States: Energy supply security, economics, and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 687-696.
    19. Leimeister, Mareike & Kolios, Athanasios, 2018. "A review of reliability-based methods for risk analysis and their application in the offshore wind industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1065-1076.
    20. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2009. "A characterization of the 2-additive Choquet integral through cardinal information," Post-Print halshs-00445132, HAL.

    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:wsi:ijitdm:v:12:y:2013:i:01:n:s021962201350003x. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm/ijitdm.shtml .

    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.