IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i22p15784-d1277042.html

From Decision Theory to Informed Decision-Making in the Design of Sustainable High-Performance Buildings

Author

Listed:
  • Aliakbar Kamari

    (Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark)

Abstract

The design of sustainable high-performance buildings entails dealing with numerous decisions associated with the inclusion and assessment of design objectives and criteria made by multiple decision-makers (or design stakeholders). A more in-depth study of the decision-making fundamentals will, therefore, be effective and practical in this regard. Based on this underlying hypothesis, as a first attempt towards investigating the decision-making structures in the (early) design of sustainable high-performance buildings, and in addition to the empirical application of normative decision-making models, this paper presents the results of two rounds of assessment surveys through conducting semi-structured interviews with practitioners and professionals in Denmark on (a) when and with whom a decision is made, and (b) to what extent a decision can be made autocratically or participatorily. The research study is intended to enable practitioners and researchers to recognize the importance of decision-making characteristics in addressing highly complex sustainability criteria in the (early) design of high-performance buildings. The outcome ensures a systematic approach to involve the right decision-makers at the right time and with suitable decision-making styles. With its strong ability to formalize problems faced by sustainability requirements, the outcome can potentially become a research avenue in future building design contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Aliakbar Kamari, 2023. "From Decision Theory to Informed Decision-Making in the Design of Sustainable High-Performance Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-27, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15784-:d:1277042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15784/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/22/15784/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth R. Maccrimmon, 1968. "Descriptive and Normative Implications of the Decision-Theory Postulates," International Economic Association Series, in: Karl Borch & Jan Mossin (ed.), Risk and Uncertainty, chapter 0, pages 3-32, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shawn P. Curley & Mark J. Young & J. Frank Yates, 1989. "Characterizing Physicians' Perceptions of Ambiguity," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 116-124, June.
    2. Claudia Yohana Arias-Portela & Jaime Mora-Vargas & Martha Caro & David Ernesto Salinas-Navarro, 2024. "Situational Awareness Errors in Forklift Logistics Operations: A Multiphase Eye-Tracking and Think-Aloud Approach," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-35, December.
    3. Keck, Steffen & Diecidue, Enrico & Budescu, David V., 2014. "Group decisions under ambiguity: Convergence to neutrality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 60-71.
    4. Sroginis, Anna & Fildes, Robert & Kourentzes, Nikolaos, 2023. "Use of contextual and model-based information in adjusting promotional forecasts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1177-1191.
    5. Machina, Mark J., 1985. "Generalized Expected Utility Analysis And The Nature Of Observed Violations Of The Independence Axiom," Regional Research Projects > 1985: S-180 Annual Meeting, March 24-27, 1985, Charleston, South Carolina 271790, Regional Research Projects > S-180: An Economic Analysis of Risk Management Strategies for Agricultural Production Firms.
    6. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Jose, Victor Richmond R. & Knowlton, Morgan & Shachter, Ross & Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Ulu, Canan, 2026. "Fifty years of decision analysis in operational research: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 329(2), pages 355-377.
    7. Hanumanthrao Kannan & Bryan L. Mesmer & Christina L. Bloebaum, 2020. "Incorporation of risk preferences in a value‐based systems engineering framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 237-257, March.
    8. John Quiggin, 1981. "Risk Perception And The Analysis Of Risk Attitudes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 25(2), pages 160-169, August.
    9. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    10. Ivan Mitrouchev & Malte Dold, 2025. "From heuristics and biases to agency," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 24(2), pages 489-508, December.
    11. Pungki Sukmana Putra & Risna Wijayanti & Djumilah Hadiwidjojo, 2022. "The effect of safety knowledge and workplace safety climate on safety performance with safety behavior as a mediator:A study on operations worker of Pindad," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(3), pages 112-119, April.
    12. Slawomir Kalinowski, 2020. "From expected utility theory to prospect theory: tracking down the experimental path after forty years," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(4), pages 39-56.
    13. Mark Perlman & Frank Bean & N. Namboodlri, 1975. "Review symposium," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 12(3), pages 549-569, August.
    14. Smith, Richard David, 1996. "Is Regret Theory an alternative basis for estimating the value of healthcare interventions?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 105-115, August.
    15. Scott Fausti & Jeffrey Gillespie, 2006. "Measuring risk attitude of agricultural producers using a mail survey: how consistent are the methods?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(2), pages 171-188, June.
    16. Francois Guillemin, 2018. "Governance by Depositors, Bank Runs and Ambiguity Aversion: A Theoretical Approach," HSE Working papers WP BRP 68/FE/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    17. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2018. "A history of statistical methods in experimental economics," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1455-1492, November.
    18. Anna Livia Croella & Martina Gregori, 2025. "Case Article—Optimizing Food Donation Delivery for the Nonprofit Company Logica&Co," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 63-72, September.
    19. He Huang & Sajid Siraj, 2025. "Quantifying and reducing the complexity of multi-line charts as a visual aid in multi-criteria decision-making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 353(1), pages 121-146, October.
    20. Rolf Aaberge & Tarjei Havnes & Magne Mogstad, 2013. "A theory for ranking distribution functions," Discussion Papers 763, Statistics Norway, Research Department.

    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:15:y:2023:i:22:p:15784-:d:1277042. 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.