Renovation priority ranking by multi-criteria assessment of architectural heritage: the case of castles

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 88-100

  Vodopivec, Barbara ^a   Žarnić, Roko ^a   Tamošaitiene, Jolanta ^b   Lazauskas, Marius ^b   Šelih, Jana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^b VILNIUS GEDIMINAS TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Lithuania)

Author keywords

AHP method; Castles; Cultural heritage preservation; Multi criteria decision methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897086359     PISSN: 1648715X     EISSN: 16489179     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3846/1648715X.2014.889771     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Aghdaie, M. H.; Hashemkhani Zolfani, S. H.; Zavadskas, E. K. 2012. Prioritizing constructing projects of municipalities based on AHP and COPRAS-G: a case study about footbridges in Iran, Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 7(2): 145-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/bjrbe.2012.20.
2. Al-Mukhtar, M. 2012. Editorial: built heritage, European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 16(5): 525-526. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2012.688531.
3. Amid, A.; Ghodsypour, S. H.; O'Brien, C. 2011. A weighted max-min model for fuzzy multi-objective supplier selection in a supply chain, International Journal of Production Economics 131(1): 139-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.04.044.
4. Appelbaum, B. 2007. Conservation treatment methodology. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
5. Battaini-Dragoni, G.2005. Guidance on heritage assessment "Our cultural diversity is what unites us", Technical Co-operation and Consultancy Programme. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
6. Bhattacharya, A.; Geraghty, J.; Young, P. 2010. Supplier selection paradigm: an integrated hierarchical QFD methodology under multiple-criteria environment, Applied Soft Computing 10(4): 1013-1027. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2010.05.025.
7. Bottani, E.; Rizzi, A. 2008. An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection-an application oriented to lead-time reduction, International Journal of Production Economics 111(2): 763-781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.03.012.
8. Chamodrakas, I.; Batis, D.; Martakos, D. 2010. Supplier selection in electronic marketplaces using satisficing and fuzzy AHP, Expert Systems with Applications 37(1): 490-498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.05.043.
9. Chan, F. T. S.; Chan, H. K. 2010. An AHP model for selection of suppliers in the fast changing fashion market, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 51(9-12): 1195-1207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2683-6.
10. Chan, F. T. S.; Kumar, N.; Tiwari, M. K.; Lau, H. C. W.; Choy, K. L. 2008. Global supplier selection: a fuzzyAHP approach, International Journal of Production Research 46(14): 3825-3857. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207540600787200.
11. Chen, Y.; Chao, R. 2012. Supplier selection using consistent fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications 39(3): 3233-3240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.09.010.
12. Cho, M.; Shin, S. 2014. Conservation or economization? Industrial heritage conservation in Incheon, Korea, Habitat International 41, 69-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.06.011.
13. Čiegis, R.;Ramanauskiene, J.;Startiene, G2009. Theoretical reasoning of the use of indicators and indices for sustainable development assessment, Inzinerine Ekonomika - Engineering Economics (3): 33-40.
14. Drury, P.; McPherson, A. 2008. Conservation principles, policies and guidance for sustainable management of the historic environment. London: English Heritage.
15. Duleba, S.; Mishina, T.; Shimazaki, Y. 2012. A dynamic analysis on public bus transport's supply quality by using AHP, Transport 27(3): 268-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2012.719838.
16. Dupagne, A.;Ruelle, C.;Teller, J.;Cornelis, B.2004. SUIT. Sustainable development of urban historical areas through an active integration within towns. Research report. Liege: LEMA, University of Liege.
17. Dutta, M.; Husain, Z. 2009. An application of multicriteria decision making to built heritage. The case of Calcutta, Journal of Cultural Heritage 10(2): 237-243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2008.09.007.
18. Expert. 2004. Expert Choice. Tutorials. Arlington: Expert Choice Inc.
19. Fairclough, G. J.; Harrison, R.; Jameson Jr., J. H.; Schofield, J. 2007. The heritage reader. English heritage. London: Routledge.
20. Giove, S.; Rosato, P.; Breil, M. 2010. An application of multicriteria decision making to build heritage. The redevelopment of Venice Arsenal, Journal of MultiCriteria Decision Analysis 17(3-4): 85-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mcda.455.
21. Girard, L. F.; De Toro, P. 2007. Integrated spatial assessment: a multicriteria approach to sustainable development of cultural and environmental heritage in San Marco dei Cavoti, Italy, Central European Journal Operational Research 15(3): 281-299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10100-007-0031-1.
22. Ho, W. 2008. Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - a literature review, European Journal of Operational Research 186(1): 211-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.004.
23. Ishizaka, A.; Labib, A. 2009. Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice: benefits and limitations, OR Insight 22(4): 201-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/ori.2009.10.
24. Ishizaka, A.; Pearman, C.; Nemery, P. 2012. AHPSort: an AHP-based method for sorting problems, International Journal of Production Research 50(17): 4767-4784. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.657966.
25. Jokilehto, J. 2005. A history of architectural conservation. Oxford: Elsevier.
26. Kaklauskas, A.; Kelpšienė, L.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Bardauskienė, D.; Kaklauskas, G.; Urbonas, M.; Sorakas, V. 2011. Crisis management in construction and real estate: conceptual modeling at the micro, mesoand macro-levels, Land Use Policy 28(1): 280-293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.008.
27. Kilincci, O.; Onal, S. A. 2011. Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company, Expert Systems with Applications 38(8): 9656-9664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.159.
28. Kim, C. J.; Yoo, W. S.; Lee, U. K.; Song, K. J.; Kang, K. I.; Cho, H. 2010. An experience curve-based decision support model for prioritizing restoration needs of cultural heritage, Journal of Cultural Heritage 11(4): 430-437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2010.03.004.
29. Kull, T. J.; Talluri, S. 2008. A supply risk reduction model using integrated multicriteria decision making, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 55(3): 409-419. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2008.922627.
30. Kutut, V.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Lazauskas, M. 2014. Assessment of priority alternatives for preservation of historic buildings using model based on ARAS and AHP methods, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 14(2): 287-294. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1644966513001386.
31. Labib, A. W. 2011. A supplier selection model: a comparison of fuzzy logic and the analytic hierarchy process, International Journal of Production Research 49(21): 6287-6299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2010.531776.
32. Lee, A. H. I. 2009a. A fuzzy AHP evaluation model for buyer-supplier relationships with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks, International Journal of Production Research 47(15): 4255-4280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207540801908084.
33. Lee, A. H. I. 2009b. A fuzzy supplier selection model with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks, Expert Systems with Applications 36(2): 2879-2893. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.01.045.
34. Levary, R. R. 2008. Using the analytic hierarchy process to rank foreign suppliers based on supply risks, Computers and Industrial Engineering 55(2): 535-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2008.01.010.
35. Mafakheri, F.; Breton, M.; Ghoniem, A. 2011. Supplier selection-order allocation: a two-stage multiple criteria dynamic programming approach, International Journal of Production Economics 132(1): 52-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.03.005.
36. Mebratu, D. 1998. Sustainability and sustainable development: historical and conceptual review, Environmental Impact Assessment Review 18(6): 493-520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(98)00019-5.
37. Moffett, A.; Sarkar, S. 2006. Incorporating multiple criteria into the design of conservation area networks: a mini review with recommendations, Diversity and Distributions 12(2): 125-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00202.x.
38. Murzyn-Kupisz, M. 2013. The socio-economic impact of built heritage projects conducted by private investors, Journal of Cultural Heritage 14(2): 156-162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2012.04.009.
39. Nyseth, T.; Sognnaes, J. 2013. Preservation of old towns in Norway: heritage discourses, community processes and the new cultural economy, Cities 13, 69-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.05.014.
40. Ordoobadi, S. M. 2010. Application of AHP and Taguchi loss functions in supply chain, Industrial Management and Data Systems 110(8): 1251-1269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02635571011077861.
41. Price, N. S.; Kirby Talley, M. Jr.; Melucco Vaccaro, A. 1996. Historical and philosophical issues in the conservation of cultural heritage. Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute.
42. Punniyamoorthy, M.; Mathiyalagan, P.; Parthiban, P. 2011. A strategic model using structural equation modeling and fuzzy logic in supplier selection, Expert Systems with Applications 38(1): 458-474. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.086.
43. Reza, B.; Sadiq, R.; Hewage, K. 2011. Sustainability assessment of flooring systems in the city of Tehran: an AHP-based life cycle analysis, Construction and Building Materials 25(4): 2053-2066. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.11.041.
44. Saaty, T. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw Hill.
45. Saaty, T.; Sagir, M. 2009. Extending the measurement of tangibles to intangibles, International Journal of Information Technology & decision Making 8(1): 7-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0219622009003247.
46. Saaty, T.; Sagir, M. 2012. Global awareness, future city design and decision making, Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering 21(3): 337-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11518-012-5196-z.
47. Saaty, T.; Shang, J. S. 2011. An innovative orders-ofmagnitude approach to AHP-based multi-criteria decision making: prioritizing divergent intangible humane acts, European Journal of Operational Research 214(3): 703-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2011.05.019.
48. Saaty, T.; Shih, H. S. 2009. Structures in decision making: on the subjective geometry of hierarchies and networks, European Journal of Operational Research 199(3): 867-872. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.064.
49. Sapač, I.2012. Kaj je grad? Problematika terminološke oznake in temeljne definicije, in Preinfalk, M. (Ed.). Iz zgodovine slovenskih gradov. Ljubljana: Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, 391-412.
50. Sevkli, M. 2010. An application of the fuzzy ELECTRE method for supplier selection, International Journal of Production Research 48(12): 3393-3405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207540902814355.
51. Sivilevičius, H. 2011. Modelling the interaction of transport system elements, Transport 26(1): 20-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2011.560366.
52. Skoglund, P.; Svensson, E. 2010. Discourses of nature conservation and heritage management in the past, present and future: discussing heritage and sustainable development from Swedish experiences, European Journal of Archaeology 13(3): 368-385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461957110386703.
53. Stopar, I.2012. Slovenski gradovi - prezrta dediščina, in Preinfalk, M. (Ed.). Iz zgodovine slovenskih gradov. Ljubljana: Zveza zgodovinskih dru(tev Slovenije,379-390.
54. Tsai, W.; Hung, S. 2009. A fuzzy goal programming approach for green supply chain optimisation under activity-based costing and performance evaluation with a value-chain structure, International Journal of Production Research 47(18): 4991-5017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207540801932498.
55. Tuan, T. H.; Navrud, S. 2007. Valuing cultural heritage in developing countries: comparing and pooling contingent valuation and choice modelling estimates, Environmental and Resource Economics 38(1): 51-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10640-006-9056-5.
56. Verbič, M.; Slabe-Erker, R. 2009. An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: a case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area, Ecological Economics 68(5): 1316-1328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.002.
57. Vidal, L. A.; Marle, F.; Bocquet, J. C. 2011. Using a Delphi process and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to evaluate the complexity of projects, Expert Systems with Applications 38(5): 5388-5405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.016.
58. Vodopivec, B. 2012. Opredelitev kriterijev in podkriterijev večkriterijske metode za oceno prioritet obnove stavbne dediščinena primeru gradovv Sloveniji. Študija, Ljubljana: Fakulteta za gradbeništvo in geodezijo.
59. Wang, H. J.; Zeng, Z. T. 2010. A multi-objective decisionmaking process for reuse selection of historic buildings, Expert Systems with Applications 37(2): 1241-1249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.034.
60. Wang, T.; Yang, Y. 2009. A fuzzy model for supplier selection in quantity discount environments, Expert Systems with Applications 36(10): 12179-12187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.03.018.
61. Yang, J. L.; Chiu, H. N.; Tzeng, G. H.; Yeh, R. H. 2008. Vendor selection by integrated fuzzy MCDM techniques with independent and interdependent relationships, Information Sciences 178(21): 4166-4183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.06.003.
62. thInternational conference on progress in cultural heritage preservation, EuroMed'12 proceedings, 340-348.
63. Zan, L.; Baraldi, S. B. 2013. The heritage chain management. General issues and a case study, China, Journal of Cultural Heritage 14(3): 211-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2012.06.007.
64. Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z.; Ustinovichius, L.; Shevchenko, G. 2010. Attributes weights determining peculiarities in multiple attribute decision making methods, Inzinerine Ekonomika - Engineering Economics 21(1): 32-43.
65. Zavadskas, E. K.; Vainiūnas, P.; Turskis, Z.; Tamo šaitienė, J. 2012. Multiple criteria decision support system for assessment of projects managers in construction, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 11(2): 501-502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0219622012400135.