Introducing a conceptual model for evaluating health safety environmental performance of residential buildings using the fuzzy decision-making approach

  • Alireza Motaghifard
  • Manouchehr OmidvariEmail author
  • Abolfazl Kaazemi


Today, the issue of the physical and psychological safety of residents of residential buildings and their impact on the environment are major concerns for residents, builders, and sellers of the construction industry. The design and construction with the Health Safety, Environmental (HSE) approach can influence the direct and indirect costs of the construction industry and is considered an important criterion for pricing at a time of sell. Creating models that can demonstrate the degree of adherence of a building to safety, health, and environmental standards can be effective in the usage as well as the physical and mental comfort of residents using that building. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to provide a conceptual model for determining the performance criteria of buildings with the HSE approach. This study was carried out based on the practical purpose of the research as well as on a descriptive-analytic method. In this study, the factors affecting HSE performance were first determined. Then, Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method was used in a fuzzy environment to measure cause and effect relationships. The findings of the research suggested that among the factors affecting building performance, the safety of the structure is the most influential factor, and the architectural welfare is the most important factor, which itself is in the category of influential factors and is affected by other factors. Creating structures that can assess the performance of a building with the Health Safety, Environmental (HSE) approach can be an important criterion in making decision at the time of designing, constructing, operating, purchasing, and housing for customers and residents of a building. This issue can be considered an indicator in the construction process. Government agencies, the insurer, and price-setting agent of buildings can also use this model for valuation and rank buildings and defining their premium rates.


Building HSE performance Construction industry Fuzzy DEMATEL HSE 



  1. Alwisy, D. A. (2018). Criteria-based ranking of green building design factors according to leading rating systems. Energy and Buildings, 178. Scholar
  2. Asdrubali, F., Baldinelli, G., Bianchi, F., & Sambuco, S. (2015). A comparison between environmental sustainability rating systems LEED and ITACA for residential buildings. Building and Environment, 86, 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, X., Yang, H., & Zhang, W. (2017). A proposed new weighting system for passive design approach in BEAM plus. Energy Procedia, 105, 2113–2118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chou, Y. C., Sun, C. C., & Yen, H. Y. (2012). Evaluating the criteria for human resource for science and technology (HRST) based on integrated fuzzy AHP and fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 12(1), 64–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ding, Z., Fan, Z., Tam, V. W. Y., Bian, Y., Li, S., Illankoon, I. M. C. S., & Moon, S. (2018). Green building evaluation system implementation. Building and Environment, 133, 32–40. Scholar
  6. Doan, D. T., Ghaffarianhoseini, A., Naismith, N., Zhang, T., Ghaffarianhoseini, A., & Tookey, J. (2017). A critical comparison of green building rating systems. Building and Environment, 123, 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fontela, E., & Gabus, A. (1974). DEMATEL, innovative methods, Report no. 2 structural analysis of the world problematique. Columbus: Battelle Geneva Research Institute.Google Scholar
  8. Freitas, I. A. S., & Zhang, X. (2018). Green building rating systems in Swedish market - a comparative analysis between LEED, BREEAM SE, GreenBuilding and Miljöbyggnad. Energy Procedia, 153, 402–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Geneva: Batelle Geneva Research Center.Google Scholar
  10. Ghaleh, S., Omidvari, M., Nassiri, P., Momeni, M., & Miri Lavasan, S. M. R. (2018). Presenting a conceptual pattern of HSE performance of oil trucks. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 190, 97. Scholar
  11. Ismaeel, W. S. E. (2018). Midpoint and endpoint impact categories in green building rating systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 783–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jassbi, J., Mohamadnejad, F., & Nasrollahzadeh, H. (2011). A fuzzy DEMATEL framework for modeling cause and effect relationships of strategy map. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(5), 5967–5973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li, R. J. (1999). Fuzzy method in group decision making. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 38(1), 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lohmeng, A., Sudasna, K., & Tondee, T. (2017). State of the art of green building standards and certification system development in Thailand. Energy Procedia, 138, 417–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mattoni, B., Guattari, C., Evangelisti, L., Bisegna, F., Gori, P., & Asdrubali, F. (2018). Critical review and methodological approach to evaluate the differences among international green building rating tools. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 950–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moussa, R. A., & Farag, A. A. (2017). The applicability of LEED of new construction (LEED-NC) in the Middle East. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 37, 572–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rogmans, T., & Ghunaim, M. (2016). A framework for evaluating sustainability indicators in the real estate industry. Ecological Indicators, 66, 603–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shamaii, A., Omidvari, M., & Lotfi, F. H. (2017). Health, safety and environmental unit performance assessmentmodel under uncertainty (case study: steel industry). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 189(1), 42. Scholar
  19. Shan, M., & Hwang, B.-g. (2018). Green building rating systems: global reviews of practices and research efforts. Sustainable Cities and Society, 39, 172–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shieh, J., Wu, H., & Huang, K. (2010). A DEMATEL method in identifying key success factors of hospital service quality. Knowledge-Based Systems, 23(3), 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Suzer, O. (2019). Analyzing the compliance and correlation of LEED and BREEAM by conducting a criteria-based comparative analysis and evaluating dual-certified projects. Building and Environment, 147, 158–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Uzunovic, E., Canizares, C., Huang, Z., Ni, Y., Shen, C., Wu, F., Chen, S., et al. (2000). Discussion of “application of unified power flow controller in interconnected power systems-modeling, interface, control strategy, and case study”[and reply]. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 15(4), 1461–1462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wei, W. W., & Yu, T. L. (2007). Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), 499–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wu, P., Song, Y., Shou, W., Chi, H., Chong, H.-Y., & Sutrisna, M. (2017). A comprehensive analysis of the credits obtained by LEED 2009 certified green buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 370–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Industrial Engineering Department, Industrial and Mechanical Engineering FacultyIslamic Azad University Qazvin BranchQazvinIran

Personalised recommendations