A systematic review on MIVES: A sustainability-oriented multi-criteria decision-making method

Cots, David Boix; Pardo-Bosch, Francesc; Blanco, Ana; Aguado, Antonio; Pujadas, Pablo

doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109515

Cited by 33 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The third most popular method according to the analysed set is MIVES (Caballero Moreno et al, 2019; Gandini et al, 2020; Hosseini et al, 2020; Oses et al, 2017; Pons et al, 2016; Pujadas et al, 2017). This tool was created precisely in favour of sustainability, in the desire to support the evaluation, prioritization, and selection of alternatives toward SD in the construction context (Boix‐Cots et al, 2022). Referring to this method it can be highlighted that: Developed in the perspective of SD, this method allows the consideration and correlation of different dimensions (Boix‐Cots et al, 2022).…”

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This tool was created precisely in favour of sustainability, in the desire to support the evaluation, prioritization, and selection of alternatives toward SD in the construction context (Boix‐Cots et al, 2022). Referring to this method it can be highlighted that: Developed in the perspective of SD, this method allows the consideration and correlation of different dimensions (Boix‐Cots et al, 2022). The papers analysed allow to observe that, indeed, in all applications in which it has been used, the three main dimensions of SD—economic, environmental and social—have been observed and related.…”

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, Gandini et al (2020) also consider the cultural dimension, and Oses et al (2017) consider separately and in addition to the dimensions of sustainability, a technical dimension specific to the reference construction context. Regarding the units of measurement which the indicators are expressed with, it is noted that in this case also the method was conceived with a view to allowing the consideration of different units of measurement. Indeed, it involves the construction of a value function that allows the qualitative and quantitative variables of the indicators, with their different units of measurement, to be converted into a single a‐dimensional scale (between 0 and 1), leading to the definition of an index of sustainability of the alternative(s) evaluated (Boix‐Cots et al, 2022; Josa et al, 2020). Indeed, the documents analysed, consider different indicators for each dimension observed and evaluated, which are quantified through different units of measurement (Caballero Moreno et al, 2019; Gandini et al, 2020; Hosseini et al, 2020; Oses et al, 2017; Pons et al, 2016; Pujadas et al, 2017).…”

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So, the project, that is, the idea or spatial framework into which the designer or planner inserts various components that he/she considers suitable (Fattinnanzi et al, 2018), should undergo a multicriteria and all-inclusive evaluation of all sustainable values, steering it in its definition. Related to this, arises the consideration of the importance of implementing a strong sustainability versus the weak sustainability model (Boggia, 2007). The concept of weak sustainability was developed from environmental economics and it is based on the concept of substitutability of different types of capital (economic, social and environmental) (Wilson & Wu, 2016).…”

Section: The Sustainable Urban and Architectural Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, the role of assessment tools and methods is to organise information and structure the process, supporting decision-makers in their sustainable choices. In this context, multi-criteria analyses play a central role, as they make it possible to take into account different criteria and indicators in the assessment, which can be expressed not only in monetary terms (Boggia, 2007). Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods support the prioritisation of decisions by allowing the simultaneous consideration of multiple criteria (i.e., economic, environmental and social) and the integration of information and perspectives derived from the actors involved in the process (Belton & Stewart, 2002;Bouyssou et al, 2006;Greco et al, 2016;Keeney & Raiffa, 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Assessing the sustainable development: A review of multi‐criteria decision analysis for urban and architectural sustainability

Mecca

2023

Multi Criteria Decision Anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development of cities constitutes nowadays a worldwide goal. Therefore, the related urban and architectural choices must fulfil sustainable objectives. In this context, sustainability assessment presents itself as a key and fundamental element to guide decision‐making processes, orienting choices towards actions that make the built environment more sustainable. Among the several existing assessment tools and methods, multi‐criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are part of the most widely used approaches to support sustainable decisions. Therefore, this article aims to understand what makes sustainability assessment through MCDA suitable or unsuitable to support decision‐making processes in the context of sustainable urban and architectural design and observe how available MCDA methods support this purpose. To do this, a literature review related to MCDA methods in sustainable urban and architectural context has been performed. Descriptive statistics and tables are provided to point out the main trends according to specific research questions. In this sense, it is intended to highlight some potential gaps and points of reflection for future research developments that can support sustainable urban and architectural development.

show abstract

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Targeted Results For Sustainable Urban and Architectural Dev...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Sustainable Urban and Architectural Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Assessing the sustainable development: A review of multi‐criteria decision analysis for urban and architectural sustainability

Mecca

2023

Multi Criteria Decision Anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

3D‐printed concrete footbridges: An approach to assess the sustainability performance

Asensio,

Josa,

Monserrat

et al. 2023

Structural Concrete

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital fabrication with concrete (DFC) is fast becoming an attractive alternative for components (i.e., façades, urban furniture) and structural typologies (i.e., short‐span footbridges, columns, floor systems) for which complex geometries derived from particular aesthetical criteria and/or construction time constrictions are governing parameters. Additionally, some authors claim that this process allows improving the sustainability of structures, as less material is necessary compared to traditional concrete solutions, thus reducing greenhouse gas emissions linked to material consumption. Nonetheless, the environmental implications of DFC are still under scrutiny and remain objectively unquantified. In this study, a sustainability assessment model to allow decision‐makers to evaluate and compare concrete footbridge alternatives—from the sustainability perspective—including those constructed by means of 3D printed concrete (3DPC) techniques, is presented. The proposed approach is based on the MIVES method. For this purpose, the most representative criteria and indicators of sustainability identified are measured and weighted‐aggregated in a decision‐making tree. The sustainability index (SI) of each alternative is the outcome derived from the application of the model, and the SI was used as reference for evaluating the alternatives. The sustainability of 3D‐printed footbridges is quantified and compared to other concrete‐based solutions: traditional reinforced cast‐in‐place and precast concrete, as traditional solutions, and ultra‐high performance precast concrete and textile‐reinforced concrete, as innovative alternatives. The results of the analysis lead to conclude that 3D‐printed footbridges have positive impacts on environmental and social indicators, but economic indicators still need to be improved to attain a competitive solution. The approach proposed herein to assess the sustainability of footbridges can be extended to other cases and stakeholders' preferences by adapting the components of the method to sensitivities and particular boundary conditions of other scenarios.

show abstract

Sustainability of column‐supported slabs for buildings: A multi‐criteria assessment

Monserrat‐López,

Josa,

Aidarov

et al. 2024

Structural Concrete

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global construction industry is experiencing significant growth, driving the demand for building floor area. However, this expansion comes with substantial environmental consequences, including high‐energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, together with economic and social impacts. To address these challenges, this research aims at providing designers and decisions‐makers with an approach that will aid the quantification of those impacts relevant for the sustainability performance of flooring systems. A holistic sustainability assessment was performed considering economic, environmental, and social aspects using the Integrated Value Model for Sustainability Evaluations. This study focused on various flooring typologies, including reinforced concrete (RC) and fiber‐RC (FRC) slabs with solid and waffle (for RC solution) configurations. The most representative criteria and indicators of sustainability for concrete column‐supported slabs were identified, measured, and weighted—aggregated in a decision‐making tree—in order to obtain a representative a sustainability index (SI) for each alternative. The results of the analysis evidence that the RC solid slab has a higher overall SI than the other alternatives, the FRC alternatives performing with similar SI of that quantified for the RC solid slab solution and the RC waffle slab being that with the lower sustainability performance among those flooring systems considered in this study. The results of a sensitivity analysis showed that those alternatives using FRC have potential for improving the overall sustainability performance.

show abstract

A systematic review on MIVES: A sustainability-oriented multi-criteria decision-making method

Cited by 33 publications

References 96 publications

Assessing the sustainable development: A review of multi‐criteria decision analysis for urban and architectural sustainability

Assessing the sustainable development: A review of multi‐criteria decision analysis for urban and architectural sustainability

3D‐printed concrete footbridges: An approach to assess the sustainability performance

Sustainability of column‐supported slabs for buildings: A multi‐criteria assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About