IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i11p1929-d116447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multi-Objective Trade-Off Model in Sustainable Construction Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Guangdong Wu

    (Department of Construction Management, Jiangxi University of Finance & Economics, Nanchang 330013, China)

Abstract

Based on the consideration of the relative importance of sustainability-related objectives and the inherent nature of sustainable construction projects, this study proposes that the contractor can balance the levels of efforts and resources used to improve the overall project sustainability. A multi-objective trade-off model using game theory was established and verified through simulation and numerical example under a moral hazard situation. Results indicate that effort levels of the contractor on sustainability-related objectives are positively related to the outcome coefficient while negatively to the coefficients of effort cost of the relevant objectives. High levels of the relative importance of sustainability-related objectives contribute to high levels of effort of the contractor. With the variation in effort levels and the coefficient of benefit allocation, the project net benefit increases before declining. The function of project benefit has a marked peak value, with an inverted “U” shape. An equilibrium always exists as for the given relative importance and coefficients of the effort costs of sustainability-related objectives. Under this condition, the owner may offer the contractor a less intense incentive and motivate the contractor reasonably arranging input resources. The coefficient of benefit allocation is affected by the contractor characteristic factors and the project characteristic factors. The owner should balance these two types of factors and select the most appropriate incentive mechanism to improve the project benefit. Meanwhile, the contractor can balance the relative importance of the objectives and arrange the appropriate levels of effort and resources to achieve a sustainability-related objective. Very few studies have emphasized the effects of the relative importance of sustainability-related objectives on the benefits of sustainable construction projects. This study therefore builds a multi-objective trade-off model to bridge this research gap. This study sheds significant theoretical and practical insights regarding the objective management of sustainability-related objectives, as well as insights into the improvement of performance in sustainable construction projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Guangdong Wu, 2017. "A Multi-Objective Trade-Off Model in Sustainable Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:11:p:1929-:d:116447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/11/1929/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/11/1929/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yongcheng Fu & Yongqiang Chen & Shuibo Zhang & Wenqian Wang, 2015. "Promoting cooperation in construction projects: an integrated approach of contractual incentive and trust," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 653-670, August.
    2. Heilmann, Roland, 2003. "A branch-and-bound procedure for the multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem with minimum and maximum time lags," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 348-365, January.
    3. Changbum Ahn & SangHyun Lee & Feniosky Peña-Mora & Simaan Abourizk, 2010. "Toward Environmentally Sustainable Construction Processes: The U.S. and Canada’s Perspective on Energy Consumption and GHG/CAP Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Mohamed Matar & Maged Georgy & Moheeb Elsaid Ibrahim, 2008. "Sustainable construction management: introduction of the operational context space (OCS)," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 261-275.
    5. He, Keyan & Tang, Renzhong & Jin, Mingzhou, 2017. "Pareto fronts of machining parameters for trade-off among energy consumption, cutting force and processing time," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 113-127.
    6. Brucker, Peter & Drexl, Andreas & Mohring, Rolf & Neumann, Klaus & Pesch, Erwin, 1999. "Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation, classification, models, and methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 3-41, January.
    7. Odysseus Manoliadis & Ioannis Tsolas & Alexandra Nakou, 2006. "Sustainable construction and drivers of change in Greece: a Delphi study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 113-120.
    8. S M Hosseinian & D G Carmichael, 2013. "Optimal gainshare/painshare in alliance projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 64(8), pages 1269-1278, August.
    9. Arshad Ali Javed & Patrick T.I. Lam & Albert P.C. Chan, 2014. "Change negotiation in public-private partnership projects through output specifications: an experimental approach based on game theory," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 323-348, April.
    10. Guangdong Wu & Jian Zuo & Xianbo Zhao, 2017. "Incentive Model Based on Cooperative Relationship in Sustainable Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-20, July.
    11. Kerkhove, L.-P. & Vanhoucke, M., 2017. "A parallel multi-objective scatter search for optimising incentive contract design in projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(3), pages 1066-1084.
    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. Miao Yu & Fangwei Zhu & Xiaotian Yang & Linzhuo Wang & Xiuxia Sun, 2018. "Integrating Sustainability into Construction Engineering Projects: Perspective of Sustainable Project Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.

    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. Guangdong Wu & Jian Zuo & Xianbo Zhao, 2017. "Incentive Model Based on Cooperative Relationship in Sustainable Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Hartmann, Sönke & Briskorn, Dirk, 2010. "A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Long Li & Zhongfu Li & Lei Jiang & Guangdong Wu & Daojin Cheng, 2018. "Enhanced Cooperation among Stakeholders in PPP Mega-Infrastructure Projects: A China Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Sheen, Gwo-Ji & Liao, Lu-Wen, 2007. "A branch and bound algorithm for the one-machine scheduling problem with minimum and maximum time lags," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(1), pages 102-116, August.
    5. Buddhakulsomsiri, Jirachai & Kim, David S., 2006. "Properties of multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problems with resource vacations and activity splitting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 279-295, November.
    6. Hartmann, Sönke & Briskorn, Dirk, 2008. "A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," Working Paper Series 02/2008, Hamburg School of Business Administration (HSBA).
    7. Haikun Han & Juqin Shen & Bo Liu & Han Han, 2022. "Dynamic Incentive Mechanism for Large-scale Projects Based on the Reputation Effects," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, October.
    8. Ali Amiri & Juudit Ottelin & Jaana Sorvari, 2019. "Are LEED-Certified Buildings Energy-Efficient in Practice?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Alexander Tesch, 2020. "A polyhedral study of event-based models for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 233-251, April.
    10. Weglarz, Jan & Józefowska, Joanna & Mika, Marek & Waligóra, Grzegorz, 2011. "Project scheduling with finite or infinite number of activity processing modes - A survey," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 208(3), pages 177-205, February.
    11. Arda Turkgenci & Huseyin Guden & Mehmet Gülşen, 2021. "Decomposition based extended project scheduling for make-to-order production," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 801-825, June.
    12. Chen, Jiaqiong & Askin, Ronald G., 2009. "Project selection, scheduling and resource allocation with time dependent returns," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 23-34, February.
    13. Ceric Anita & Ivic Ivona, 2021. "Network analysis of interconnections between theoretical concepts associated with principal–agent theory concerning construction projects," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 2450-2464, January.
    14. Asbach, Lasse & Dorndorf, Ulrich & Pesch, Erwin, 2009. "Analysis, modeling and solution of the concrete delivery problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(3), pages 820-835, March.
    15. Wendi Tian & Erik Demeulemeester, 2014. "Railway scheduling reduces the expected project makespan over roadrunner scheduling in a multi-mode project scheduling environment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 271-291, February.
    16. Byung-Cheon Choi & Changmuk Kang, 2019. "A linear time–cost tradeoff problem with multiple milestones under a comb graph," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 341-361, August.
    17. Andrzej Kozik, 2017. "Handling precedence constraints in scheduling problems by the sequence pair representation," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 445-472, February.
    18. Xiong, Jian & Leus, Roel & Yang, Zhenyu & Abbass, Hussein A., 2016. "Evolutionary multi-objective resource allocation and scheduling in the Chinese navigation satellite system project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 662-675.
    19. Che khairil Izam Che Ibrahim & Seosamh B. Costello & Suzanne Wilkinson, 2013. "Development of a conceptual team integration performance index for alliance projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(11), pages 1128-1143, November.
    20. Rolf H. Möhring & Andreas S. Schulz & Frederik Stork & Marc Uetz, 2003. "Solving Project Scheduling Problems by Minimum Cut Computations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 330-350, March.

    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:9:y:2017:i:11:p:1929-:d:116447. 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.