IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i8p2211-d222273.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hybrid Tool for Visual Pollution Assessment in Urban Environments

Author

Listed:
  • Khydija Wakil

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, National University of Science & Technology (NUST), Islamabad H-12, Pakistan)

  • Malik Asghar Naeem

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, National University of Science & Technology (NUST), Islamabad H-12, Pakistan)

  • Ghulam Abbas Anjum

    (Department of City & Regional Planning, University of Engineering & Technology (UET), Lahore 54000, Pakistan)

  • Abdul Waheed

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, National University of Science & Technology (NUST), Islamabad H-12, Pakistan)

  • Muhammad Jamaluddin Thaheem

    (Department of Construction Engineering, National University of Science & Technology (NUST), Islamabad H-12, Pakistan)

  • Muhammad Qadeer ul Hussnain

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, National University of Science & Technology (NUST), Islamabad H-12, Pakistan)

  • Raheel Nawaz

    (Department of Operations, Technology, Events and Hospitality Management, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester M13 9PL, UK)

Abstract

With increasing focus on more nuanced aspects of quality of life, the phenomenon of urban visual pollution has been progressively gaining attention from researchers and policy makers, especially in the developed world. However, the subjectivity and complexity of assessing visual pollution in urban settings remain a challenge, especially given the lack of robust and reliable methods for quantification of visual pollution. This paper presents a novel systematic approach for the development of a robust Visual Pollution Assessment (VPA) tool. A key feature of our methodology is explicit and systematic incorporation of expert and public opinion for listing and ranking Visual Pollution Objects (VPOs). Moreover, our methodology deploys established empirical complex decision-making techniques to address the challenge of subjectivity in weighting the impact of individual VPOs. The resultant VPA tool uses close-ended options to capture the presence and characteristics of various VPOs on a given node. Based on these inputs, it calculates a point based visual pollution scorecard for the observation point. The performance of the VPA tool has been extensively tested and verified at various locations in Pakistan. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such tool, both in terms of quantitative robustness and broad coverage of VPOs. Our VPA tool will help regulators in assessing and charting visual pollution in a consistent and objective manner. It will also help policy makers by providing an empirical basis for gathering evidence; hence facilitating evidence-based and evidence-driven policy strategies, which are likely to have significant impact, especially in the developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Khydija Wakil & Malik Asghar Naeem & Ghulam Abbas Anjum & Abdul Waheed & Muhammad Jamaluddin Thaheem & Muhammad Qadeer ul Hussnain & Raheel Nawaz, 2019. "A Hybrid Tool for Visual Pollution Assessment in Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2211-:d:222273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2211/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2211/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sung-Ho Kil & Dong Kun Lee & Jun-Hyun Kim & Ming-Han Li & Galen Newman, 2016. "Utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Establish Weighted Values for Evaluating the Stability of Slope Revegetation based on Hydroseeding Applications in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Belton, Valerie, 1986. "A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 7-21, July.
    3. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    4. Mwana N. Mawapanga & David L. Debertin, 1996. "Choosing between Alternative Farming Systems: An Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(3), pages 385-401.
    5. Enache Elena & Morozan Cristian & Purice Suzana, 2012. "Visual Pollution: A New Axiological Dimension Of Marketing?," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 820-826, 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. Mohammad AlElaiwi & Mugahed A. Al-antari & Hafiz Farooq Ahmad & Areeba Azhar & Badar Almarri & Jamil Hussain, 2022. "VPP: Visual Pollution Prediction Framework Based on a Deep Active Learning Approach Using Public Road Images," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-26, December.
    2. Mahsa Farahani & Seyed Vahid Razavi-Termeh & Abolghasem Sadeghi-Niaraki & Soo-Mi Choi, 2023. "A Hybridization of Spatial Modeling and Deep Learning for People’s Visual Perception of Urban Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-30, July.

    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. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    2. Chuc Anh Tu & Tapan Sarker & Ehsan Rasoulinezhad, 2020. "Factors Influencing the Green Bond Market Expansion: Evidence from a Multi-Dimensional Analysis," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-14, June.
    3. Susana Martín-Fernández & Adrián Gómez-Serrano & Eugenio Martínez-Falero & Cristina Pascual, 2018. "Comparison of AHP and a Utility-Based Theory Method for Selected Vertical and Horizontal Forest Structure Indicators in the Sustainability Assessment of Forest Management in the Sierra de Guadarrama N," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Jae Young Jang & Min Jae Park, 2019. "A Study on Global Investors’ Criteria for Investment in the Local Currency Bond Markets Using AHP Methods: The Case of the Republic of Korea," Risks, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    6. Hanyu Lu & Lufei Huang, 2021. "Optimization of Shore Power Deployment in Green Ports Considering Government Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    7. Sandra E. Strasser & Ceyhun Ozgur & David L. Schroeder, 2002. "Selecting a Business College Major: An Analysis of Criteria and Choice Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(2), pages 47-56.
    8. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Pei Li, 2016. "The New Product Online Evaluation by Expert Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process Method," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 265-265, August.
    10. Khameis Al Abdouli & Khalid Hussein & Dawit Ghebreyesus & Hatim O. Sharif, 2019. "Coastal Runoff in the United Arab Emirates—The Hazard and Opportunity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.
    11. T Kainulainen & P Leskinen & P Korhonen & A Haara & T Hujala, 2009. "A statistical approach to assessing interval scale preferences in discrete choice problems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 252-258, February.
    12. Satheeskumar Navaratnam, 2022. "Selecting a Suitable Sustainable Construction Method for Australian High-Rise Building: A Multi-Criteria Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.
    14. Greco, Salvatore, 1997. "A new PCCA method: IDRA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 587-601, May.
    15. Seul-gi Lee & Bashir Adelodun & Mirza Junaid Ahmad & Kyung Sook Choi, 2022. "Multi-Level Prioritization Analysis of Water Governance Components to Improve Agricultural Water-Saving Policy: A Case Study from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Sureeyatanapas, Panitas & Sriwattananusart, Kawinpob & Niyamosoth, Thanawath & Sessomboon, Weerapat & Arunyanart, Sirawadee, 2018. "Supplier selection towards uncertain and unavailable information: An extension of TOPSIS method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 69-79.
    17. Tavana, M. & Kennedy, D. T. & Joglekar, P., 1996. "A group decision support framework for consensus ranking of technical manager candidates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 523-538, October.
    18. B. Senakumari Arunnima & Dharmaseelan Bijulal & R. Sudhir Kumar, 2023. "Open Innovation Intellectual Property Risk Maturity Model: An Approach to Measure Intellectual Property Risks of Software Firms Engaged in Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-19, July.
    19. Tomasz Witold Trojanowski & Pawel Tadeusz Kazibudzki, 2021. "Prospects and Constraints of Sustainable Marketing Mix Development for Poland’s High-Energy Consumer Goods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    20. Iwasaki, S & Tone, K, 1998. "A Search Model with Subjective Judgments: Auditing of Incorrect Tax Declarations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 249-261, April.

    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:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2211-:d:222273. 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.