No abstract

No abstract

The fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, which has affected the whole world in recent years and has had devastating effects on all segments of society, has been one of the most important priorities. The Turkish Standards Institution has determined a checklist to contribute to developing safe and clean environments in higher education institutions in Turkey and to follow-up on infection control measures. However, this study is only a checklist that makes it necessary for decision-makers to make a subjective evaluation during the evaluation process, while the need to develop a more effective, systematic framework that takes into account the importance levels of multiple criteria has emerged. Therefore, this study applies the best-worst method under interval type-2 fuzzy set concept (IT2F-BWM) to determine the importance levels of criteria affecting the “COVID-19 safe campus” evaluation of universities in the context of global pandemic. A three-level hierarchy consisting of three main criteria, 11 sub-criteria, and 58 sub-criteria has been created for this aim. Considering the hierarchy, the most important sub-criterion was determined as periodic disinfection. The high contribution of the interval-valued type-2 fuzzy sets in expressing the uncertainty in the decision-makers’ evaluations and the fact that BWM provides criterion weights with a mathematical optimization model that produces less pairwise comparisons and higher consistency are the main factors in choosing this approach. Simple additive weighting (SAW) has also been injected into the IT2F-BWM to determine the safety level of any university campus regarding COVID-19. Thus, decision-makers will be better prepared for the devastating effects of the pandemic by first improving the factors that are relatively important in the fight against the pandemic. In addition, a threshold value will be determined by considering all criteria, and it will prepare the ground for a road map for campuses. A case study is employed to apply the proposed model, and a comparison study is also presented with the Bayesian BWM to validate the results of the criteria weights. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11356-022-22796-1.