IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3083-d1061838.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multicriteria Model for Determining the Best and Low-Cost Methods of Industrial Heritage Transformation and Utilization under Fuzzy Inputs

Author

Listed:
  • Fanlei Meng

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Yuxiang Pang

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Yeqing Zhi

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

Abstract

The renovation and utilization of industrial heritage are important issues in the field of sustainable urban renewal. The renovation of industrial heritage is influenced by various factors such as the value of a heritage site, its location, the positioning of renovation, and the cost of renovation. Most existing studies focus on the concept of renovation and the establishment of heritage management techniques. However, a low cost in the context of urban sustainability has a greater impact on renovation. Therefore, this paper takes Beijing Xinhua 1949 Cultural and Creative Industrial Park as an example, incorporates the cost–benefit ratio into the plans for a low-cost construction, and proposes a method to evaluate the performance of holistic low-cost construction during the whole life cycle of industrial heritage renovation and utilization. This study uses the AHP method to create an evaluation index system and fuzzy TOPSIS(FTOPSIS) to rank the solutions so as to establish a comprehensive evaluation system to thus evaluate industrial heritage renovation projects that are difficult to fully quantify, with the aim to obtain performance evaluation conclusions. The results of this study suggest that the definition of a low-cost renovation should not be limited to a reduction in investment costs but should also pay equal attention to the cost–benefit ratio before and after renovation, and that functional and spatial sustainability is another feasible strategy for achieving the sustainable renovation of industrial heritage.

Suggested Citation

  • Fanlei Meng & Yuxiang Pang & Yeqing Zhi, 2023. "Multicriteria Model for Determining the Best and Low-Cost Methods of Industrial Heritage Transformation and Utilization under Fuzzy Inputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3083-:d:1061838
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3083/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3083/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dušan M. Milošević & Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2020. "Implementation of Adjusted Fuzzy AHP Method in the Assessment for Reuse of Industrial Buildings," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    3. Ivan Simic & Aleksandra Stupar & Aleksandar Grujicic & Vladimir Mihajlov & Marija Cvetkovic, 2022. "The Transformation of Dorćol Power Plant: Triggering a Sustainable Urban Regeneration or Selling the Heritage?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Stefania De Gregorio & Mariangela De Vita & Pierluigi De Berardinis & Luis Palmero & Alessandra Risdonne, 2020. "Designing the Sustainable Adaptive Reuse of Industrial Heritage to Enhance the Local Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Jun-Sik Eom & Sung-Hoon Yoon & Dai-Whan An, 2021. "The Sustainability of Regenerative Cafes Utilizing Idle Industrial Facilities in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Cristina Piselli & Jessica Romanelli & Matteo Di Grazia & Augusto Gavagni & Elisa Moretti & Andrea Nicolini & Franco Cotana & Francesco Strangis & Henk J. L. Witte & Anna Laura Pisello, 2020. "An Integrated HBIM Simulation Approach for Energy Retrofit of Historical Buildings Implemented in a Case Study of a Medieval Fortress in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    8. Mariangela De Vita & Francesco Duronio & Angelo De Vita & Pierluigi De Berardinis, 2022. "Adaptive Retrofit for Adaptive Reuse: Converting an Industrial Chimney into a Ventilation Duct to Improve Internal Comfort in a Historic Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-24, March.
    9. 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)

    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. Mateusz Piwowarski & Danuta Miłaszewicz & Małgorzata Łatuszyńska & Mariusz Borawski & Kesra Nermend, 2018. "Application of the Vector Measure Construction Method and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity Ideal Solution for the Analysis of the Dynamics of Changes in the Poverty Levels in the European ," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    4. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    5. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Oner, Oytun & Khalilpour, Kaveh, 2022. "Evaluation of green hydrogen carriers: A multi-criteria decision analysis tool," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    7. Dimitris Giannakopoulos & Zografia Karekou & Elli Menegaki & Elisavet Tsilimantou & Charalabos Ioannidis & Eleni Maistrou & Antonios Giannikouris & Antonia Moropoulou, 2022. "Reuse of Historic Buildings in the Medieval City of Rhodes to Comply with the Needs of Sustainable Urban Development," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-27, August.
    8. Wu, Yunna & Zhang, Ting & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Xiaoyu & Ke, Yiming & Chu, Han & Xu, Ruhang, 2019. "Location selection of seawater pumped hydro storage station in China based on multi-attribute decision making," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 410-425.
    9. Elzbieta Broniewicz & Karolina Ogrodnik, 2021. "A Comparative Evaluation of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods for Sustainable Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    10. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Passador, João Luiz, 2022. "On the choice of public or private management models in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Alok K. Pandey & R. Krishankumar & Dragan Pamucar & Fausto Cavallaro & Abbas Mardani & Samarjit Kar & K. S. Ravichandran, 2021. "A Bibliometric Review on Decision Approaches for Clean Energy Systems under Uncertainty," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-27, October.
    12. Yupeng Liu & Yutao Yang & Yue Liu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2019. "Improving Sustainable Mobile Health Care Promotion: A Novel Hybrid MCDM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-29, January.
    13. Haonan Yang & Liang Chen & Huan Huang & Panyu Tang, 2022. "Measurement and Spatial-Temporal Evolution Characteristics of Low-Carbon Cities with High-Quality Development: The Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Jingyuan Shi & Jiaqing Sun, 2023. "Prefabrication Implementation Potential Evaluation in Rural Housing Based on Entropy Weighted TOPSIS Model: A Case Study of Counties in Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    15. R. N. Ossei-Bremang & F. Kemausuor, 2021. "A decision support system for the selection of sustainable biomass resources for bioenergy production," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 437-454, September.
    16. Ahmed Mohammed & Morteza Yazdani & Amar Oukil & Ernesto D. R. Santibanez Gonzalez, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach towards Resilient Sourcing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-30, March.
    17. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    18. Yongming Song & Jun Hu, 2017. "Vector similarity measures of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    20. Wu, Zhangsheng & Li, Yue & Wang, Rong & Xu, Xu & Ren, Dongyang & Huang, Quanzhong & Xiong, Yunwu & Huang, Guanhua, 2023. "Evaluation of irrigation water saving and salinity control practices of maize and sunflower in the upper Yellow River basin with an agro-hydrological model based method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).

    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:4:p:3083-:d:1061838. 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.