IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p6403-d568862.html

Developing and Applying a Model for Evaluating Risks Affecting Greening Existing Buildings

Author

Listed:
  • Usama Issa

    (Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ibrahim Sharaky

    (Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mamdooh Alwetaishi

    (Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ashraf Balabel

    (Mechanical Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Amal Shamseldin

    (Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ahmed Abdelhafiz

    (Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mohammed Al-Surf

    (U.S. Green Building Council and Green Business Certification Inc., Jeddah 23525, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mosleh Al-Harthi

    (Electrical Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia)

  • Medhat M. A. Osman

    (Architectural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Minia University, Minia 61519, Egypt)

Abstract

Improving building performance through reducing negative environmental impacts can be achieved by greening existing buildings (GEB), which is considered a very important sustainability process. Due to the risky and uncertain nature of the process of GEB, a growing amount of attention should be given to eliminating the effects of risks on GEB. This research aims to identify most expected risk factors related to GEB, as well as to evaluate their effects through calculating risk factor characteristics, such as risk factor presence (RFP), impact on the GEB process (IGEB), and impact on building performance in the long run (IBP), as new indices describe these risks. Sixty-six risk factors were categorized in seven risk groups related to the economic aspect, social aspect, environmental aspect, managerial aspect, sustainability operation, sustainable design, and renovation. Moreover, a fuzzy model for risk analysis was developed to combine the multi-effects of the aforementioned three risk factor characteristics in one index representing the risk factors’ overall importance. The model was applied and verified for data collected in Saudi Arabia. The results of this study showed that the most important risk group is the greening process of environmental control, while the least important is the greening process of renovation and construction. Using the proposed model improved the results of evaluating risks affecting GEB through merging the multi-effects of risk factor characteristics. The results and analysis proved that the most important key risk factors were environmental in nature. An intricate relationship of the impacts on the GEB process and building performance with the overall importance of the risk factors was clearly found. The decision makers who deal with greening projects in Saudi Arabia should be aware of the key risks identified in this study. The proposed methodology and model can be easily applied to other countries to help decision makers in evaluating their GEB projects, as well as comparing more greening projects based on risk analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Usama Issa & Ibrahim Sharaky & Mamdooh Alwetaishi & Ashraf Balabel & Amal Shamseldin & Ahmed Abdelhafiz & Mohammed Al-Surf & Mosleh Al-Harthi & Medhat M. A. Osman, 2021. "Developing and Applying a Model for Evaluating Risks Affecting Greening Existing Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6403-:d:568862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6403/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6403/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abimbola Olukemi Windapo, 2014. "Examination of Green Building Drivers in the South African Construction Industry: Economics versus Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-19, September.
    2. J. H. M. Tah & V. Carr, 2000. "A proposal for construction project risk assessment using fuzzy logic," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 491-500.
    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. Usama Issa & Muwaffaq Alqurashi & Ibrahim Salama, 2021. "Qualitative Analysis of Risks Affecting the Delivery of Land Surveying Project Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.

    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. Aleksandar Senić & Momčilo Dobrodolac & Zoran Stojadinović, 2024. "Predicting Extension of Time and Increasing Contract Price in Road Infrastructure Projects Using a Sugeno Fuzzy Logic Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Hani Alyami & Paul Tae-Woo Lee & Zaili Yang & Ramin Riahi & Stephen Bonsall & Jin Wang, 2014. "An advanced risk analysis approach for container port safety evaluation," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(7), pages 634-650, December.
    3. Jin Kook Yang & Le Dinh Thuc & Pham Phu Cuong & Nguyen Van Du & Huu‐Bang Tran, 2023. "Evaluating a driving index of nonresidential green building implementation for sustainable development in developing countries from a Vietnamese perspective," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1720-1734, June.
    4. Reza Kiani Mavi & Denise Gengatharen & Neda Kiani Mavi & Richard Hughes & Alistair Campbell & Ross Yates, 2021. "Sustainability in Construction Projects: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Yinan Li & Neng Zhu & Beibei Qin, 2019. "Major Barriers to the New Residential Building Energy-Efficiency Promotion in China: Frontlines’ Perceptions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-28, March.
    6. Gholamreza Dehdasht & Rosli Mohamad Zin & M. Salim Ferwati & Mu’azu Mohammed Abdullahi & Ali Keyvanfar & Ronald McCaffer, 2017. "DEMATEL-ANP Risk Assessment in Oil and Gas Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-24, August.
    7. Patricia Romero-Lankao & Daniel M. Gnatz & Olga Wilhelmi & Mary Hayden, 2016. "Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Abraham Park & Chen Yu Chang, 2013. "Impacts of Construction Events on the Project Equity Value of the Channel Tunnel Project," ERES eres2013_97, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    9. Usama H. Issa & Ashraf Balabel & Mohammed Abdelhakeem & Medhat M. A. Osman, 2021. "Developing a Risk Model for Assessment and Control of the Spread of COVID-19," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-15, February.
    10. Hala Sanboskani & Mounir El Asmar & Elie Azar, 2022. "Green Building Contractors 2025: Analyzing and Forecasting Green Building Contractors’ Market Trends in the US," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-23, July.
    11. Dina Azhgaliyeva & Dil Rahut, 2022. "Promoting Green Buildings: Barriers, Solutions, and Policies," ADBI Working Papers 1331, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    12. Sabriye Topal & Emine Atasoylu, 2022. "A Fuzzy Risk Assessment Model for Small Scale Construction Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    13. Cabrera Llanos, Agustín I. & Ortiz Arango, Francisco & Dávila Aragón, Griselda, 2022. "Caracterización de la productividad de una empresa mexicana desarrolladora de tecnología mediante control difuso [Characterization of the productivity of a Mexican technology development company through fuzzy control]," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 34(1), pages 281-304, December.
    14. Pia Pässilä & Lauri Pulkka & Seppo Junnila, 2015. "How to Succeed in Low-Energy Housing—Path Creation Analysis of Low-Energy Innovation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-22, July.
    15. Ana Maria Marinoiu & Mihaela Gabriela Belu & Iulia Țarțavulea (Dieaconescu), 2016. "Towards Sustainable Building: Case Study on Romania," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 19(60), pages 103-122, June.
    16. Ke Guo & Yongbo Yuan, 2021. "Geographic Distribution and Influencing Factor Analysis of Green Residential Buildings in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, November.
    17. John Malu Nzioki & Dr. Mary Nyawira Mwenda, 2021. "Enhancing Performance of the Building Construction Industry through Quantitative Risk Analysis and Risk Response: A Case of Exchequer Funded Building Construction Projects in Machakos County, Kenya," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(3), pages 31-39, March.
    18. Huiru Zhao & Nana Li, 2015. "Risk Evaluation of a UHV Power Transmission Construction Project Based on a Cloud Model and FCE Method for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-30, March.
    19. Cunbin Li & Yunqi Liu & Shuke Li, 2016. "Risk Evaluation of Qinghai–Tibet Power Grid Interconnection Project for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, January.
    20. Xiao, Zengqi & Lam, Jasmine Siu Lee, 2019. "Willingness to take contractual risk in port public-private partnerships under economic volatility: The role of institutional environment in emerging economies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 106-116.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6403-:d:568862. 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.