IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4059-d180855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework in Selection of Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) Method

Author

Listed:
  • Jianmin Jia

    (School of Transportation Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan 250101, Shandong, China
    Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3730, Miami, FL 33174, USA)

  • Mohamed Ibrahim

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3730, Miami, FL 33174, USA)

  • Mohammed Hadi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3730, Miami, FL 33174, USA)

  • Wallied Orabi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3730, Miami, FL 33174, USA)

  • Yan Xiao

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3730, Miami, FL 33174, USA)

Abstract

Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) is bridge construction that uses innovative planning, design and construction methods in a safe and cost-effective manner, which reduces construction mobility and environmental impacts, and contributes to city sustainable planning and development. To deal with the pressing need to support the decisions associated with the selection between the ABC and conventional bridge construction, this paper presents the development of a multi-criteria evaluation framework. Methods are developed and identified to estimate the construction, agency, and user costs associated with the construction methods. A novel model was developed to allow the estimation of the construction and agency costs of ABC relative to conventional construction. This paper also demonstrates the estimation of user costs, including those associated with mobility, reliability, safety, and emissions, utilizing combinations of the proposed prediction method. The paper then compares the use of the return-on-investment and Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) evaluation approaches in the decision to select between ABC and conventional bridge construction. The results from the employment of the two approaches to a case study demonstrate the advantage of using the TOPSIS approach, which is also applicable in the urban planning process.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianmin Jia & Mohamed Ibrahim & Mohammed Hadi & Wallied Orabi & Yan Xiao, 2018. "Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework in Selection of Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4059-:d:180855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4059/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4059/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guo, Sen & Zhao, Huiru, 2015. "Optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station by using fuzzy TOPSIS based on sustainability perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 390-402.
    2. Kannan, Devika & Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa & Jabbour, Charbel José Chiappetta, 2014. "Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: Using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(2), pages 432-447.
    3. 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.
    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. Mehdi Keshavarz-Ghorabaee & Maghsoud Amiri & Mohammad Hashemi-Tabatabaei & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2020. "A New Decision-Making Approach Based on Fermatean Fuzzy Sets and WASPAS for Green Construction Supplier Evaluation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Baosheng Xu & Ningning Qi & Jianpeng Zhou & Qingfu Li, 2022. "Reliability Assessment of Highway Bridges Based on Combined Empowerment–TOPSIS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.

    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. Jing Wang & Jian-Qiang Wang & Hong-Yu Zhang & Xiao-Hong Chen, 2017. "Distance-Based Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Approaches with Multi-Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Information," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(04), pages 1069-1099, July.
    2. Athanasios P. Vavatsikos & Efstratios Tsesmetzis & Georgios Koulinas & Dimitrios Koulouriotis, 2022. "A robust group decision making framework using fuzzy TOPSIS and Monte Carlo simulation for wind energy projects multicriteria evaluation," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 6055-6073, November.
    3. Fuli Zhou & Yun Lin & Xu Wang & Lin Zhou & Yandong He, 2016. "ELV Recycling Service Provider Selection Using the Hybrid MCDM Method: A Case Application in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-22, May.
    4. Zhang, Lu & Cui, Li & Chen, Lujie & Dai, Jing & Jin, Ziyi & Wu, Hao, 2023. "A hybrid approach to explore the critical criteria of online supply chain finance to improve supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    5. Nock, Destenie & Baker, Erin, 2019. "Holistic multi-criteria decision analysis evaluation of sustainable electric generation portfolios: New England case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 655-673.
    6. Danijela Tuljak-Suban & Patricija Bajec, 2022. "A Hybrid DEA Approach for the Upgrade of an Existing Bike-Sharing System with Electric Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-23, October.
    7. Yang, Jun & Guo, Fang & Zhang, Min, 2017. "Optimal planning of swapping/charging station network with customer satisfaction," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 174-197.
    8. Caetani, Alberto Pavlick & Ferreira, Luciano & Borenstein, Denis, 2016. "Development of an integrated decision-making method for an oil refinery restructuring in Brazil," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 197-210.
    9. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    10. Zhi Li & Guanghao Jin & Shen Duan, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Dynamics for Financial Risk Decision-Making in Global Supply Chain," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, October.
    11. Yongli Wang & Xiangyi Zhou & Hao Liu & Xichang Chen & Zixin Yan & Dexin Li & Chang Liu & Jiarui Wang, 2023. "Evaluation of the Maturity of Urban Energy Internet Development Based on AHP-Entropy Weight Method and Improved TOPSIS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-18, July.
    12. Csiszár, Csaba & Csonka, Bálint & Földes, Dávid & Wirth, Ervin & Lovas, Tamás, 2020. "Location optimisation method for fast-charging stations along national roads," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Wanying Zhong & Yue Wang, 2022. "A study on the spatial and temporal variation of urban integrated vulnerability in Southwest China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(3), pages 2855-2882, December.
    14. Ghadimi, Pezhman & Ghassemi Toosi, Farshad & Heavey, Cathal, 2018. "A multi-agent systems approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation in a partnership supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 286-301.
    15. Xu, Haoxin & Romagnoli, Alessandro & Sze, Jia Yin & Py, Xavier, 2017. "Application of material assessment methodology in latent heat thermal energy storage for waste heat recovery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 281-290.
    16. Woo, Hyeon & Son, Yongju & Cho, Jintae & Kim, Sung-Yul & Choi, Sungyun, 2023. "Optimal expansion planning of electric vehicle fast charging stations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 342(C).
    17. Oluwasola O. Ademulegun & Paul MacArtain & Bukola Oni & Neil J. Hewitt, 2022. "Multi-Stage Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Siting Electric Vehicle Charging Stations within and across Border Regions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-28, December.
    18. Zhou, Guangyou & Zhu, Zhiwei & Luo, Sumei, 2022. "Location optimization of electric vehicle charging stations: Based on cost model and genetic algorithm," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    19. Yun Jin & Hecheng Wu & Dechao Sun & Shouzhen Zeng & Dandan Luo & Bo Peng, 2019. "A Multi-Attribute Pearson’s Picture Fuzzy Correlation-Based Decision-Making Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-12, October.
    20. Amir Abbas Shojaie & Sepideh Babaie & Emel Sayah & Davood Mohammaditabar, 2018. "Analysis and Prioritization of Green Health Suppliers Using Fuzzy ELECTRE Method with a Case Study," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 19(1), pages 39-52, March.

    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:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4059-:d:180855. 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.