Using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) for Evaluating the Factors Affecting Building Rehabilitation Cost Management in Iraq
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aims to evaluate the factors affecting building rehabilitation cost management using the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) model. A literature review, case studies, consultations with experts, and questionnaires were used to identify and categorize fifty-seven factors into six categories. The proposed model has considered twenty factors out of the fifty-seven. The main factor with the highest weight in building rehabilitation cost management in Iraq is the building characteristics, with a weight of 0.298. Design and bill of quantities issues follow this with a weight of 0.204. The next factor is project management Issues with a weight of 0.185. Planning and contract management factors come next with a weight of 0.150. Safety and environmental factors have a weight of 0.104. The element with the lowest weight is economic and financial factors, with a weight of 0.058. This order of elements highlights their importance in affecting cost management. The prioritization within each category is outlined with due consideration to the weights assigned to the main factors. The significance of required quality standards and site visit to the building under the design and bill of quantities, while planning and contract management prioritize project duration and general and specific contract conditions. Building characteristics prioritize the number of floors in the building and its location, economic and financial factors emphasize fluctuations in currency exchange rates and labor costs, and safety and environmental concerns are anchored by health, safety, awareness and training. Project management emphasizes change orders and a lack of coordination among team.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
Abdullah, L., Najib, L., 2014. A new type-2 fuzzy set of linguistic variables for the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(7), pp. 3297-3305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.11.028
Al-Shiblawi, A. A. O., Erzaij, K. R., 2017. Evaluation of the current situation to application of building information modeling in Iraq. International Journal of Science and Research, 6(3), pp. 1788-1792.
Buckley, J. J., 1985. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3), pp. 233-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9.
Chan, D. W., Kumaraswamy, M. M., 1997. A comparative study of causes of time overruns in Hong Kong construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), pp. 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(96)00039-7
Cheng, C.-H., Mon, D.-L., 1994. Evaluating weapon system by analytical hierarchy process based on fuzzy scales. Fuzzy sets and Systems, 63(1), pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(94)90140-6
Dağdeviren, M., Yüksel, İ., 2008. Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Information Sciences, 178(6), pp. 1717-1733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.10.016
Erzaij, K. R., Obaid, A. A., 2017. Application of building information modeling (3D and 4D) in construction sector in Iraq. Journal of Engineering, 23(10), pp. 30-43. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2017.10.03.
Golestani, N., Arzaghi, E., Abbassi, R., and Garaniya, V., 2022. A novel approach to environmental risk mitigation during construction and installation of a wind farm. Proceedings of The Sixth Australasia and South-East Asia Structural Engineering and Construction Conference (ASEA-SEC-6),
https://doi.org/10.14455/ISEC.2022.9%282%29.RAD-06.
Goyal, N., Kharola, S., Kumar, A., Ram, M., Saini, S., and Bedi, P., 2021. Reliability analysis using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP). Intelligent Communication, Control and Devices: Proceedings of ICICCD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1510-8_37.
Gul, M., Guven, B., Guneri, A. F., 2018. A new Fine-Kinney-based risk assessment framework using FAHP-FVIKOR incorporation. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, pp. 53, 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2017.08.014
Harris, S. Y., 2001. Building pathology: deterioration, diagnostics, and intervention. John Wiley and Sons.
Hasan, S. A. H., Rasheed, S., and Salih, A. H., 2024. Public procurement crisis of Iraq and its impact on construction projects. Journal of Engineering, 30(02), pp. 128-141. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2024.02.09.
He, Q., Ming, Z., Xu, J., and Hu, Y., 2022. Research on the information price measurement of commercial concrete based on FAHP-BP Method. In ICCREM 2022, pp. 759-767. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/9780784484562.083.
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., and Pal, D. K., 2015. Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 7(4), pp. 396-403. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975
Jovanović, B., Filipović, J., and Bakić, V., 2015. Prioritization of manufacturing sectors in Serbia for energy management improvement–AHP method. Energy Conversion and Management, 98, pp. 225-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.03.107.
Kadhim, E. M. a. A., Meervat R., 2023. Factors affecting building maintenance practices. Journal of Engineering, 29(12), pp. 153-172. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2023.12.10.
Kamas, W.M., Naji, H.I. and Hasan, A.A., 2017. Evaluation of urban planning projects criteria using fuzzy AHP technique. Journal of Engineering, 23(5), pp.12-26. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2017.05.02
Kannan, D., Khodaverdi, R., Olfat, L., Jafarian, A., and Diabat, A. 2013. Integrated fuzzy multi criteria decision making method and multi-objective programming approach for supplier selection and order allocation in a green supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, pp. 355-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.02.010.
Khashei-Siuki, A., Sharifan, H., 2020. Comparison of AHP and FAHP methods in determining suitable areas for drinking water harvesting in Birjand aquifer. Iran. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 10, 100328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100328.
Khorramrouz, F., Pourmahdi Kajabadi, N., Rahiminezhad Galankashi, M., and Mokhatab Rafiei, F. 2019. Application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) in failure investigation of knowledge-based business plans. SN Applied Sciences, 1, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1394-3.
Kim, J., Han, S., Hyun, C., 2016. Minimizing fluctuation of the maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation cost profile of a building. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 30(3), pp. 04015034. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000775.
Kometa, S. T., Olomolaiye, P. O., and Harris, F. C., 1994. Attributes of UK construction clients influencing project consultants' performance. Construction Management and Economics, 12(5), pp. 433-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446199400000053.
Koroteev, D., Huang, J., and Kamrunnaher, M., 2020. Construction cost control and duration analysis of rehabilitation project. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1687/1/012012.
Kumar, R., Suman, S. K., 2022. Prioritization of flexible pavement sections for maintenance using multi-criteria FAHP integrated with multi-attribute utility theory. Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 6(3), pp. 633-656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-022-00235-5.
Liu, Y., Eckert, C. M., and Earl, C., 2020. A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Systems with Applications, 161, 113738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738.
Lyu, H.-M., Sun, W.-J., Shen, S.-L., and Zhou, A.-N., 2020. Risk assessment using a new consulting process in fuzzy AHP. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(3), p. 04019112. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001757.
Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., and Zavadskas, E. K., 2015. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications–Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(8), pp. 4126-4148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.003.
Mistarihi, M. Z., and Magableh, G. M., 2023. Prioritization of supply chain capabilities using the FAHP technique. Sustainability, 15(7), p. 6308. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076308.
Ren, J.J., Zhang, Q., Zhang, Y.C., Wei, K., Zhang, K.Y., Ye, W.l., and Zhang, Y., 2023. Evaluation of slab track quality indices based on entropy weight-fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Engineering Failure Analysis, 149, 107244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107244.
Saaty, T. L., 1980. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(11), pp. 1073-1076.
Shaygan, A., Testik, Ö. M., 2019. A fuzzy AHP-based methodology for project prioritization and selection. Soft Computing, 23, pp. 1309-1319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-017-2851-9.
Van Laarhoven, P. J., Pedrycz, W., 1983. A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11(1-3), pp. 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(83)80082-7.
Vigneault, M.-A., Boton, C., Chong, H.-Y., and Cooper-Cooke, B. (2020). An innovative framework of 5D BIM solutions for construction cost management: a systematic review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 27, pp. 1013-1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09341-z.
Vinogradova-Zinkevič, I., 2023. Comparative sensitivity analysis of some fuzzy AHP methods. Mathematics, 11(24), 4984. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11244984.
Zadeh, L. A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), pp. 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X.
Zhang, X., Xing, X., Xie, Y., Zhang, Y., Xing, Z., and Luo, X., 2019. Airport operation situation risk assessment: combination method based on FAHP and fine Kinney. Sixth International Conference on Transportation Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482742.049.