Author
Listed:
- Cheolheung Park
(Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
- Minwook Son
(Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
- Jongmyeong Kim
(Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
- Byeol Kim
(Institute of Environmental & Energy Technology, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
- Yonghan Ahn
(Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
- Nahyun Kwon
(Center for AI Technology in Construction, Hanyang University ERICA, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea)
Abstract
This research aims to identify and prioritize key planning elements for the redevelopment of such housing complexes by incorporating perspectives from both experts (supply-side) and residents (demand-side). To achieve this, a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making framework was developed by integrating the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). A total of 25 planning elements were identified through Focus Group Interviews and organized into five domains: legal and institutional reforms, project feasibility, residential conditions, social integration, and complex design. The AHP was used to assess the relative importance of each element based on responses from 30 experts and 130 residents. The analysis revealed a clear divergence in priorities: experts emphasized feasibility and regulatory considerations, while residents prioritized livability and spatial quality. Subsequently, the TOPSIS method was applied to evaluate four real-world redevelopment cases. From the supply-side perspective, Seoul A District received the highest score (0.58), whereas from the demand-side perspective, Gyeonggi D District ranked highest (0.69), illustrating the differing priorities of stakeholders. Overall, Gyeonggi D District emerged as the most favorable option in the combined evaluation. This research contributes a structured and inclusive decision-making framework for the regeneration of public housing. By explicitly comparing and quantifying the contrasting preferences of key stakeholders, it underscores the critical need to balance technical feasibility with resident-centered values in future redevelopment initiatives.
Suggested Citation
Cheolheung Park & Minwook Son & Jongmyeong Kim & Byeol Kim & Yonghan Ahn & Nahyun Kwon, 2025.
"TOPSIS and AHP-Based Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Evaluating Redevelopment in Old Residential Projects,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-20, August.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:15:p:7072-:d:1717395
Download full text from publisher
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:17:y:2025:i:15:p:7072-:d:1717395. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.