An Integrated Structural Equation Modeling and Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach to Prioritize Investment in the Construction Industry to Achieve Sustainable Development in Saudi Arabia

Abstract

The construction industry is a major contributor to socio economic development and an extensive user of energy and natural resources; therefore, its engagement is fundamental to sustainability. This research prioritizes investment spending in the construction sector in Saudi Arabia to meet sustainable development. This research uses integrated structure equation modeling (SEM) and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) as a solution approach for prioritizing the alternatives for the decision maker. Experts and decision makers have been interviewed to define the main and subcriteria and the corresponding pairwise comparison matrix. Economic, environmental, and social (EES) criteria were considered, including 8, 8, and 5 subcriteria, respectively. SmartPLS applying the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method and expert choice for AHP were used to rank investment in the construction sector in Saudi Arabia in order to attain sustainable development. The SEM results revealed that the influencing factors are 5 economic, 5 environmental, and 3 social subcriteria in sustainable development. The results indicated that building projects ranked first at 13.9%, followed by water and sanitation activities at 11.2%, and by electrical works business at 10.8%. Road work ranked fourth at 8.6%, accompanied by mechanical activities at 6.4%. The electronic works category ranked sixth at 6.2%, and then landscaping works at 4.8%. The dams category ranked eighth at 3.3%; city cleaning and waste disposal achieved a percentage of 3.1%, and the remaining categories achieved percentages of between 0.07% and 1.9%. The recommendations were that the Saudi government

Multiple Criteria Decision Making for the Achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals: A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda

“…The contributions of MCDM methods for the achievement of SDGs belonging to this category are highlighted in 56 studies, as follows: SDG 2-"Zero Hunger and Sustainable Agriculture" [106][107][108][109][110][111][112][113][114][115][116], SDG 3-"Good Health and Well-being" [117][118][119][120][121][122][123], SDG 4-"Inclusive and Quality Education" [124][125][126][127][128], SDG 7-"Affordable and Clean Energy" , and SDG 11-"Sustainable Cities and Communities" [153][154][155][156][157][158][159][160][161]. 4.4.1.…”

“…A summary of the MCDM research concerning SDG 11 [153][154][155][156][157][158][159][160][161] is presented in Table 15. Concerning sustainable urban construction problems, two articles integrated the AHP method with other methods and used sensitivity analysis [157,160]. Ahmed et al [157] integrated AHP, TOPSIS, and OSM methods to prioritize sustainable concrete supplementary materials.…”

“…Ahmed et al [157] integrated AHP, TOPSIS, and OSM methods to prioritize sustainable concrete supplementary materials. In turn, Mansour et al [160] also used a hybrid MCDM approach to prioritize investment in the construction industry to achieve SDG 11 targets in Saudi Arabia.…”

“…Four studies used utility-based methods, namely the AHP method, single or combined with other MCDM methods for different purposes [155,157,159,160]. By way of illustration, Lehner et al [155] used the AHP method combined with GIS and sensitivity analysis to identify the most relevant urban sustainability indicators for monitoring cities' services and quality of life (QoL) employing remote sensing techniques.…”

“…Table 16 summarizes the articles reviewed in this category and the contributions of MCDM methods for the achievement of SDG 6 [158][159][160][161][162][163][164]. Most of the articles considered water security as a strategy for achieving SDG 6 targets and prioritizing options by using several MCDM approaches [162,163,165,166,168].…”