Abstract:With society turning increasingly to sustainable development, sharper demands are being made concerning energy efficiency and other properties that mean reductions in the negative effects of the building on the environment and people. This means that architects must have a suitably adapted solution already in the early design phase, as this has the greatest influence on the final result. Current tools and methods used for this are either focused only on individual topics or are too complex and not adapted for independent use by architects. The paper presents a simplified method for evaluating building sustainability (SMEBS) which addresses these needs. It is intended as a tool to aid architects in the early project planning phases as it allows a quick evaluation of the extent to which the demands of sustainable building are fulfilled. The method was developed on the basis of a study of international building sustainability assessment methods (BSAM) and standards in this field. Experts in sustainable construction were invited to determine weights for assessment parameters using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Their judgments reflect the specific characteristics of the local environment.

a b s t r a c tGroup decision making is an important part of multiple criteria decision making and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The aim of this paper was to compare group AHP methods. Seven simple group AHP aggregation techniques that could be attractive for applications selected from the vast array of group AHP models proposed in the literature were selected for evaluation. We developed three new measures of evaluation: group Euclidean distance, group minimum violations, and distance between weights for the purpose of evaluation. The results of seven group AHP methods of the theoretical example were evaluated by three new evaluation measures, satisfactory index and fitting performance index. Furthermore, a case study of a decision making problem from the construction engineering field was performed and nine group AHP aggregation techniques, seven of them formerly presented and two new two stage group approaches were applied. Finally, the case study was evaluated using all five measures for each of the nine group decision making methods. The results showed that not all group AHP methods are equally convenient and that the selection of the method depended on the specific application.

Motiviranje zaposlenih u slovenskim i hrvatskim drvoprerađivačkim poduzećima u uvjetima gospodarske krize Received -prispjelo:13. 12. 2010. Accepted -prihvaćeno: 27. 4. 2011. UDK: 630*79 doi:10.5552/drind.2011 Original scientifi c paper • Izvorni znanstveni rad

No abstract

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a method for solving multiple criteria decision problems, as well as group decision making. The weighted geometric mean method (WGMM) is appropriate when aggregation of individual judgements (AIJ) is used. This paper presents a new proof which confirms the theorem that if the comparison matrices of all decision makers are of acceptable consistency, then the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix (WGMCJM) also is of acceptable consistency. This theorem was presented and first proved by Xu (2000), but Lin et al. ( 2008) rejected the proof. We also discuss under what conditions the WGMCJM is of acceptable consistency when not all comparison matrices of decision makers are of acceptable consistency. For this case we determine the upper bound for the consistency ratio of WGMCJM and provide numerical examples.

Environmental management problems can be dealt with by combining participatory methods, which make it possible to include various stakeholders in a decision-making process, and multi-criteria methods, which offer a formal model for structuring and solving a problem. This paper proposes a three-phase decision making approach based on the analytic network process and SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis. The approach enables inclusion of various stakeholders or groups of stakeholders in particular stages of decision making. The structure of the proposed approach is composed of a network consisting of an objective cluster, a cluster of strategic goals, a cluster of SWOT factors and a cluster of alternatives. The application of the suggested approach is applied to a management problem of Pohorje, a mountainous area in Slovenia. Stakeholders from sectors that are important for Pohorje (forestry, agriculture, tourism and nature protection agencies) who can offer a wide range of expert knowledge were included in the decision-making process. The results identify the alternative of "sustainable development" as the most appropriate for development of Pohorje. The application in the paper offers an example of employing the new approach to an environmental management problem. This can also be applied to decision-making problems in various other fields.

The primary aims of forest management are to rank and evaluate the effects of forest management scenarios on human communities, landscapes, and the development of forest services, and to achieve a balance between the economic, environmental, social, and cultural uses of forests. Multi-criteria decision methodology offers an effective alternative to address such forest management issues, particularly if they involve multiple stakeholders -including local communities, public representatives, and environmentalists -each of which possess different knowledge, experiences, and prospects. Group methods, based on participatory planning, can be applied to integrate such different interests into an optimal, joint decision. It is for this reason that a new decision model based on a group fuzzy analytic network process was designed. In a case study of the forest area at Pohorje, Slovenia, alternative development scenarios were evaluated by means of the generated model. Six possible management scenarios defined by sustainability indicators were identified. The scenarios were compared and assessed by several stakeholders according to the results of a SWOT analysis. The results reveal that most attention should be devoted to preserved nature, cultural heritage, and local tradition.

Considering the growing importance of energy-efficient building methods, timber construction will play an increasingly important role in the future. In order to determine advantages and disadvantages of using wood as a leading constructional material, different construction types were compared: solid wood, wood-frame, concrete, and brick construction. To quantify the comparisons the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was applied. AHP enables the inclusion of various parameters, including descriptive ones, in a mathematical model through which the importance of each construction criterion forming part of the system can be calculated in order to provide objective decisions for construction. Analysis revealed that the top ranked criteria in decision-making include embodied energy, construction cost and design. On comparing different construction types the wood-frame construction, which can have very low or negative carbon footprint, was considered as the most suitable option for public building.