A decision-making model for supporting selection of green building materials

References

• Adhikari M, Ghimire LP, Kim Y, Aryal P, Khadka SB. 2020. Identification and analysis of barriers against electric vehicle use. Sustainability. 12(12):4850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akadiri PO, Olomolaiye PO, Chinyio EA. 2013. Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects. Autom Constr. 30:113–125.
   Google Scholar
• Akadiri PO, Olomolaiye PO. 2012. Development of sustainable assessment criteria for building materials selection. Eng Const Arch Man. 19(6):666–687.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Atesh E, Rahmawati Y, Zawawi NAWA. 2021. Sustainability criteria for green building material selection in the Malaysian construction industry. Proceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Offshore and Environmental Engineering. Springer, p. 693–700.
   Google Scholar
• Almusaed A, Almssad A, Homod RZ, Yitmen I. 2020. Environmental profile on building material passports for hot climates. Sustainability. 12(9):3720.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arif M, Bendi D, Toma‐Sabbagh T, Sutrisna M. 2012. Construction waste management in India: an exploratory study. Construct Innov. 12(2):133–155.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby MF, Johnson K. 2002. Materials and design: the art and science of material selection in product design. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Baharetha S, Al-Hammad A, Alshuwaikhat H. 2013. Towards a unified set of sustainable building materials criteria. ICSDEC 2012: Developing the Frontier of Sustainable Design, Engineering, and Construction, p. 732–740.
   Google Scholar
• Beder S. 2006. Environmental principles and policies: an interdisciplinary introduction. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Belton V, Stewart TJ. 2002. Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Bohari AAM, Xia B. 2015. Developing green procurement framework for construction projects in Malaysia. Conference: The 6th International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management (EPPM2015), At Surfers Paradise Marriott Resort & Spa, Gold Coast, QLD.
   Google Scholar
• Buniya MK, Othman I, Durdyev S, Sunindijo RY, Ismail S, Kineber AF. 2021. Safety program elements in the construction industry: The case of Iraq. IJERPH. 18(2):411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunz KR, Henze GP, Tiller DK. 2006. Survey of sustainable building design practices in North America, Europe, and Asia. J Archit Eng. 12(1):33–62.
   Google Scholar
• Calkins M. 2008. Materials for sustainable sites: a complete guide to the evaluation, selection, and use of sustainable construction materials. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Chan AP, Adabre MA. 2019. Bridging the gap between sustainable housing and affordable housing: The required critical success criteria (CSC). Build Environ. 151:112–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Z-S, Martínez L, Chang J-P, Wang X-J, Xionge S-H, Chin K-S. 2019. Sustainable building material selection: A QFD-and ELECTRE III-embedded hybrid MCGDM approach with consensus building. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 85:783–807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Okudan GE, Riley DR. 2010. Sustainable performance criteria for construction method selection in concrete buildings. Autom Constr. 19(2):235–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dezhi L, Yanchao C, Hongxia C, Kai G, Hui EC-M, Yang J. 2016. Assessing the integrated sustainability of a public rental housing project from the perspective of complex eco-system. Habitat Int. 53:546–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diabat A, Kannan D, Mathiyazhagan K. 2014. Analysis of enablers for implementation of sustainable supply chain management – A textile case. J Cleaner Prod. 83:391–403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon L, Lave R, Mansfield B, Wylie S, Shapiro N, Chan AS, Murphy M. 2019. Situating data in a Trumpian era: The environmental data and governance initiative. Ann Am Assoc Geograph. 109(2):545–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eshtehardian E, Ghodousi P, Bejanpour A. 2013. Using ANP and AHP for the supplier selection in the construction and civil engineering companies; case study of Iranian company. KSCE J Civ Eng. 17(2):262–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florez L, Castro D, Irizarry J. 2013. Measuring sustainability perceptions of construction materials. Constr Innov. 13(2):217–234.
   Google Scholar
• Fowler FJ. Jr, 2013. Survey research methods. California, USA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Frontczak M, Wargocki P. 2011. Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Build Environ. 46(4):922–937.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gan X, Zuo J, Wu P, Wang J, Chang R, Wen T. 2017. How affordable housing becomes more sustainable? A stakeholder study. J Cleaner Prod. 162:427–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GhaffarianHoseini A, Dahlan ND, Berardi U, GhaffarianHoseini A, Makaremi N, GhaffarianHoseini M. 2013. Sustainable energy performances of green buildings: A review of current theories, implementations and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 25:1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghashat H. 2012. The governance of Libyan ports: determining a framework for successful devolution. Edinburgh Napier University. Ethos.
   Google Scholar
• Gluch P, Gustafsson M, Thuvander L. 2009. An absorptive capacity model for green innovation and performance in the construction industry. Construct Manage Econ. 27(5):451–464.
   Google Scholar
• Golubchikov O, Badyina A. 2012. Sustainable housing for sustainable cities: a policy framework for developing countries. Nairobi (Kenya): UN-HABITAT.
   Google Scholar
• Govindan K, Kaliyan M, Kannan D, Haq AN. 2014. Barriers analysis for green supply chain management implementation in Indian industries using analytic hierarchy process. Int J Prod Econ. 147:555–568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan K, Shankar KM, Kannan D. 2016. Sustainable material selection for construction industry–A hybrid multi criteria decision making approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 55:1274–1288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo H, Liu Y, Meng Y, Huang H, Sun C, Shao Y. 2017. A comparison of the energy saving and carbon reduction performance between reinforced concrete and cross-laminated timber structures in residential buildings in the severe cold region of China. Sustainability. 9(8):1426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R. 2010. Confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate data analysis, 7th ed.; Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Education, Inc., p. 600–638.
   Google Scholar
• Harputlugil T, Prins M, Gültekin T, Topçu I. 2011. Conceptual framework for potential implementations of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) methods for design quality assessment. In: Management and Innovation for a Sustainable Built Environment, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Jun 20–23, ISBN 9789052693958.
   Google Scholar
• Hashempour M, Heidari A, Shahi Jounaghani M. 2020. The efficiency of hybrid BNN-DWT for predicting the construction and demolition waste concrete strength. Int J Eng. 33:1544–1552.
   Google Scholar
• Ishizaka A, Labib A. 2009. Analytic hierarchy process and expert choice: Benefits and limitations. Or Insight. 22(4):201–220.
   Google Scholar
• Jain H, Shrivastava S. 2016. Accounting of water footprint in substructure in a typical multistorey concrete building. In: The 7th International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment, Earl's Regency Hotel, Kandy, Dec 16–18.
   Google Scholar
• Kanthe V, Deo S, Murmu M. 2020. Early age shrinkage behavior of triple blend concrete. Int J Eng. 33:1459–1464.
   Google Scholar
• Khoshnava SM, Rostami R, Valipour A, Ismail M, Rahmat AR. 2018. Rank of green building material criteria based on the three pillars of sustainability using the hybrid multi criteria decision making method. J Cleaner Prod. 173:82–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kineber AF, Othman I, Oke AE, Chileshe N, Alsolami B. 2020a. critical value management activities in building projects: A case of Egypt. Buildings. 10(12):239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kineber AF, Othman I, Oke AE, Chileshe N, Buniya MK. 2020b. Identifying and assessing sustainable value management implementation activities in developing countries: The case of Egypt. Sustainability. 12(21):9143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kineber AF, Othman I, Oke AE, Chileshe N, Buniya MK. 2021a. Impact of value management on building projects success: Structural equation modeling approach. J Constr Eng Manage. 147(4):04021011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kineber AF, Othman I, Oke AE, Chileshe N, Zayed T. 2021b. Prioritization of value management implementation critical success factors for sustainable residential building: A structural equation modelling approach. J Cleaner Prod. 293:126115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucukaltan B, Topcu YI. 2019. Assessment of key airline selection indicators in a strategic decision model. JEIM. 32(4):646–667.
   Google Scholar
• Lee WJ, Mwebaza R. 2020. The role of the climate technology centre and network as a climate technology and innovation matchmaker for developing countries. Sustainability. 12(19):7956.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leedy P, Ormrod J. 2013. The nature and tools of research. Pract Res Plan Des. 1:1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Leung M-y, Wang C, Wei X. 2020. Structural model for the relationships between indoor built environment and behaviors of residents with dementia in care and attention homes. Build Environ. 169:106532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis WG, Pun KF, Lalla TR. 2006. Empirical investigation of the hard and soft criteria of TQM in ISO 9001 certified small and medium‐sized enterprises. Int J Qual Reliab Mgmt. 23(8):964–985.
   Google Scholar
• Lu W, Webster C, Peng Y, Chen X, Zhang X. 2017. Estimating and calibrating the amount of building-related construction and demolition waste in urban China. Int J Construct Manage. 17(1):13–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucko G, Alves TDC, Angelim VL. 2014. Challenges and opportunities for productivity improvement studies in linear, repetitive, and location-based scheduling. Construct Manage Econ. 32(6):575–594.
   Google Scholar
• Lucko G, Rojas EM. 2010. Research validation: Challenges and opportunities in the construction domain. J Constr Eng Manage. 136(1):127–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathiyazhagan K, Gnanavelbabu A, Prabhuraj BL. 2019. A sustainable assessment model for material selection in construction industries perspective using hybrid MCDM approaches. JAMR. 16(2):234–259.
   Google Scholar
• Mattoni B, Guattari C, Evangelisti L, Bisegna F, Gori P, Asdrubali F. 2018. Critical review and methodological approach to evaluate the differences among international green building rating tools. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 82:950–960.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oke AE, Kineber AF, Albukhari I, Othman I, Kingsley C. 2021. Assessment of cloud computing success factors for sustainable construction industry: The case of Nigeria. Buildings. 11(2):36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olanipekun AO, Chan AP, Xia B, Adedokun OA. 2018. Applying the self-determination theory (SDT) to explain the levels of motivation for adopting green building. Int J Construct Manage. 18(2):120–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Othman I, Al-Ashmori YY, Rahmawati Y, Amran YM, Al-Bared MAM. 2021. The level of building information modelling (BIM) implementation in Malaysia. Ain Shams Eng J. 12(1):455–463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Othman I, Kineber A, Oke A, Zayed T, Buniya M. 2021. Barriers of value management implementation for building projects in Egyptian construction industry. Ain Shams Eng J. 12(1):21–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pourghasemi HR, Beheshtirad M, Pradhan B. 2016. A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of modified analytical hierarchy process (M-AHP) and Mamdani fuzzy logic models using Netcad-GIS for forest fire susceptibility mapping. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk. 7(2):861–885.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pradhan P, Costa L, Rybski D, Lucht W, Kropp JP. 2017. A systematic study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) interactions. Earth's Future. 5(11):1169–1179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahardjati R, Khamidi F, Idrus A. 2010. The level of importance of criteria and sub criteria in green building index Malaysia. In: International Conference on Sustainable Building and Infrastructure (ICSBI 2010), p. 15–17.
   Google Scholar
• Rahla KM, Mateus R, Bragança L. 2019. Comparative sustainability assessment of binary blended concretes using Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs) and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). J Cleaner Prod. 220:445–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahmawati Y, Utomo C, Zawawi NAWA. 2019. BIM and e-negotiation practices in AEC consulting businesses. Sustainability. 11(7):1911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramaswamy K, Kalidindi SN. 2009. Waste in Indian building construction projects. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the IGLC. Taipei, Taiwan.
   Google Scholar
• Rao RV. 2008. A decision making methodology for material selection using an improved compromise ranking method. Mater Design. 29(10):1949–1954.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezaei-Moghaddam K, Karami E. 2008. A multiple criteria evaluation of sustainable agricultural development models using AHP. Environ Dev Sustain. 10(4):407–426.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 1986. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Manage Sci. 32(7):841–855.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 1994. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces. 24(6):19–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. IJSSCI. 1(1):83–98.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 2016. The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In: Multiple criteria decision analysis. New York, USA: Springer, p. 363–419.
   Google Scholar
• Sengupta N. 2008. Use of cost-effective construction technologies in India to mitigate climate change. Curr Sci. 94(1):38–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen L, Muduli K, Barve A. 2015. Developing a sustainable development framework in the context of mining industries: AHP approach. Resour Policy. 46:15–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh EM, Singh DP. 2008. Violence: impact and intervention. New Delhi, India: Atlantic Publishers & Dist.
   Google Scholar
• Spiegel R, Meadows D. 2010. Green building materials: a guide to product selection and specification. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Švajlenka J, Kozlovská M. 2018. Perception of user criteria in the context of sustainability of modern methods of construction based on wood. Sustainability. 10:116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanko BL, Abdullah F, Ramly ZM, Enegbuma WI. 2018. An implementation framework of value management in the Nigerian construction industry. BEPAM. 8(3):305–319.
   Google Scholar
• Umar UA, Tukur H, Khamidi M, Alkali AU. 2013. Impact of environmental assessment of green building materials on sustainable rating system. AMR. 689:398–402.
   Google Scholar
• Wang H, Bai H, Liu J, Xu H. 2012. Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing Strategic Environmental Assessment effectiveness. Ecol Indic. 23:413–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J-J, Jing Y-Y, Zhang C-F, Zhao J-H. 2009. Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 13(9):2263–2278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weißenberger M, Jensch W, Lang W. 2014. The convergence of life cycle assessment and nearly zero-energy buildings: The case of Germany. Energy Build. 76:551–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong JK, Li H. 2008. Application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems. Build Environ. 43(1):108–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Z, Li H, Feng Y, Luo X, Chen Q. 2019. Developing a green building evaluation standard for interior decoration: A case study of China. Build Environ. 152:50–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yiu SN. 2019. An empirical investigation of the current application and future development of the safety management system (SMS) in the Hong Kong construction industry. https://theses.lib.polyu.edu.hk/handle/200/10193.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou C-C, Yin G-F, Hu X-B. 2009. Multi-objective optimization of material selection for sustainable products: artificial neural networks and genetic algorithm approach. Mater Design. 30(4):1209–1215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zuo J, Pullen S, Rameezdeen R, Bennetts H, Wang Y, Mao G, Zhou Z, Du H, Duan H. 2017. Green building evaluation from a life-cycle perspective in Australia: A critical review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 70:358–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar