Abstract
Being prone to dispute, airport projects involve diverse stakeholders including also national and international aviation authorities, and this complicates the dispute resolution process in these projects. Hence, decision-makers should not entirely rely on standard forms of contracts to settle disputes in airport projects. Instead, these projects necessitate a specific dispute resolution framework that meets their needs. Even though some effort has already been devoted to developing a framework for ADR selection, most of these studies neglect airport projects. Furthermore, existing studies fell short of adopting more advanced techniques such as fuzzy set logic and Fuzzy VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija | Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), posing a variety of drawbacks. Thus, this study aims to guide decision-makers by developing a selection framework of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods to resolve disputes in airport projects. Firstly, the literature was reviewed comprehensively to reveal the criteria affecting the selection of ADR methods. Next, Focus Group Discussion (FGD) session was conducted with the participation of 17 experts who have diverse experiences in the dispute resolution process in airport projects to omit or validate the detected criteria obtained from the literature review. This was then followed by the Fuzzy VIKOR method to evaluate the importance of each ADR method. In the final step, sensitivity analysis was performed to confirm the reliability of the results. The results confirmed that a plethora of factors governs the ADR selection process, pinpointing the need for a systematic and holistic framework. Secondly, the “Expert Determination” was determined to be the most convenient ADR method for airport projects. The “Expert Determination” was followed by the “Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB)” and “Arbitration”, respectively. Revealing the very first holistic framework concerning ADR selection for airport projects, this study significantly contributes to the dispute resolution domain. Furthermore, this proposed framework is believed to have promising benefits for the decision-makers while drafting the contract clauses in terms of ADR methods in airport projects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abwunza AA, Peter TK, Muigua K (2020) Explaining delays in construction arbitration: A process-control model approach. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 12(2):04520003, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000371
Al-Zwainy FMS (2018) A state-of-the-art survey to estimate construction costs in highway and bridge projects: Analytical diagnostic study. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology 9(5):795–821
Al-Zwainy FMS, Jaber FK, Hachem SW (2018) Diagnostic of the claims and disputes between the contractor and owner in construction project using narrative analysis approach. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology 9(12):619–626
Al-Zwainy FMS, Mezher RA (2018) Diagnose the causes of cost deviation in highway construction projects by using root cause analysis techniques. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering 43(4):2001–2012, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-017-2850-2
Alabi BNT, Saeed TU, Amekudzi-Kennedy A, Keller J, Labi S (2021) Evaluation criteria to support cleaner construction and repair of airport runways: A review of the state of practice and recommendations for future practice. Journal of Cleaner Production 312(May):127776, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127776
Aladağ H, Işık Z (2019) Design and construction risks in BOT type mega transportation projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 26(10):2223–2242, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-08-2018-0351
Alıcı A, Battal Ü (2018) Türkiye’de Havalimanı Proje Finansmaninda Karşılaşılan Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma - Airport Project Financing in Turkey, Research on Problems and Solutions. Researchgate, Akademisyen Yayınevi, 1–19
Alkan D (2019) Türk İş Hukukunda Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları, Maltepe Üniversitesi, 1–173
Arditi D, Pulket T (2005) Predicting the outcome of construction litigation using boosted decision trees. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 19(4):75–81, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2005)19:4(387)
Arıcı Y (2012) İnşaat Sektöründe ADR (Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları) Kullanımı ve Seçim Kriterlerinin Kamu ve Özel Sektör Açısından İncelenmesi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, 1–137
Aritonang DD, Simanjuntak RA (2020) Analysis of important factors in choosing or using process alternative dispute resolution of construction project from contractor’s perspective (Case Study in XYZ Company, Ltd’s). IOP Conference Serie Materials Science and Engineering 1–6
Barkai J (2011) Using alternative dispute resolution techniques in construction disputes. SSRN Electronic Journal, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1435381
Bektas S, Talat Birgonul M, Dikmen I (2021) Integrated probabilistic delay analysis method to estimate expected outcome of construction delay disputes. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 13(1):04520037–1–18, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000439
Budayan C (2019) Evaluation of delay causes for BOT projects based on perceptions of different stakeholders in turkey. Journal of Management in Engineering 35(1):04018057, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000668
Bulur A (2010) Avukatlık Kanunu Madde 35/A’nin Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları Çerçevesinde İrdelenmesi ve Bir Düzenleme Önerisi. TBB Dergisi 89:196–241
Bvumbwe C, Thwala DW (2011) An exploratory study of dispute resolution methods in the south african construction industry. 2011 International Conference on Information and Finance, Singapore, 32–36
Çamcı Ç (2008) Kamu İnşaatlarında Ortaya Çıkan Uyuşmazlıklar: Örnek Kararlar Işığında Uyuşmazlık Nedenlerinin İncelenmesi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, 69–73
Chan IYS, Leung M, Yu SSW (2012) Managing the stress of hong kong expatriate construction professionals in mainland china: Focus group study exploring individual coping strategies and organizational support. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 138(10):150–1160, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000533
Chan EH, Suen HC, Chan CK (2006) MAUT-Based dispute resolution selection model prototype for international construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 132(5):444–451, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2006)132:5(444)
Cheung S-O (1999) Critical factors affecting the use of alternative dispute resolution processes in construction. International Journal of Project Management 17(3):189–194, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00027-1s
Cheung S-O, Lam T-I, Leung M-Y, Wan Y-W (2001) An analytical hierarchy process based procurement selection method. Construction Management and Economics 19(4):427–437, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/014461901300132401
Cheung SO, Suen HCH (2002) A multi-attribute utility model for dispute resolution strategy selection. Construction Management and Economics 20(7):557–568, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190210157568
Cheung SO, Yeung YW (1998) The effectiveness of the dispute resolution advisor system: A critical appraisal. International Journal of Project Management 16(6):367–374, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00010-6
Chong HY, Zin RM (2012) Selection of dispute resolution methods: Factor analysis approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 19(4):428–443, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981211237120
Dainty ARJ, Cheng MI, Moore DR (2003) Redefining performance measures for construction project managers: An empirical evaluation. Construction Management and Economics 21(2):209–218, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000049737
El-adaway IH, Ezeldin AS, Yates JK (2009) Arbitral tribunal proceedings case study: Egyptian large-scale construction project. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 1(3):147–153, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1943-4162(2009)1:3(147)
El-Adaway IH, Kandil AA (2010) Multiagent system for construction dispute resolution (MAS-COR). Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136(3):303–315, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000144
Fenn P, Lowe D, Speck C (2010) Conflict and dispute in construction. Construction Management & Economics 15(6):513–518, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/014461997372719
Hameed AA, Al-Zwainy FMS (2022) Statistical evaluation of the planning and scheduling management process for irrigation and drainage projects. Journal of Algebraic Statistics 13(2):259–282, DOI: https://doi.org/10.52783/jas.v13i2.163
Harisankar KS, Sreeparvathy G (2013) Rethinking dispute resolution in public-private partnerships for infrastructure development in India. Article Journal of Infrastructure Development 5(1):21–32, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0974930613488292
Hasoğlu A (2016) İdare hukukunda alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm yolları. Ankara Üniversietesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 65(4):1981–1996
Haugen T, Singh A (2015) Dispute resolution strategy selection. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 7(3):05014004, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000160
Kamvysi K, Gotzamani K, Andronikidis A, Georgiou AC (2014) Capturing and prioritizing students’ requirements for course design by embedding Fuzzy-AHP and linear programming in QFD. European Journal of Operational Research 237(3):1083–1094, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.02.042
Keršulienė V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z (2010) Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of Business Economics and Management 11(2):243–258, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.12
Kisi KP, Lee N, Kayastha R, Kovel J (2020) Alternative dispute resolution practices in international road construction contracts. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 12(2):1–9, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000373
Klein H, Britain G (2006) “Alternative dispute resolution procedures used to resolve construction disputes in the UK” XXIII FIG Congress TS, Munich, 1–16
Koulinas GK, Marhavilas PK, Demesouka OE, Vavatsikos AP, Koulouriotis DE (2019) Risk analysis and assessment in the worksites using the fuzzy-analytical hierarchy process and a quantitative technique - A case study for the Greek construction sector. Safety Science 112:96–104, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.10.017
Lee CK, Yiu TW, Cheung SO (2016) Selection and use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in construction projects — Past and future research. International Journal of Project Management 34(3):494–507, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.12.008
Lee CK, Yiu TW, Cheung SO (2018a) Application of the theory of planned behavior to alternative dispute resolution selection and use in construction projects. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 10(2):04518003, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000252
Lee CK, Yiu TW, Cheung SO (2018b) Understanding intention to use alternative dispute resolution in construction projects: Framework based on technology acceptance model. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 10(1):04517021, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000245
Liu H-C, Quan M-Y, Li Z, Wang Z-L (2019) A new integrated MCDM model for sustainable supplier selection under interval-valued intuitionistic uncertain linguistic environment. Information Sciences 486:254–270, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2019.02.056
Liu H-C, You J-X, You X-Y, Shan M-M (2015) A novel approach for failure mode and effects analysis using combination weighting and fuzzy VIKOR method. Applied Soft Computing 28:579–588, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.11.036
Liu P, Wu X (2012) A competency evaluation method of human resources managers based on multi-granularity linguistic variables and VIKOR method. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 18(4):696–710, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2012.753169
Manoj G, Shivaji CY (2010) Design interface management of airport projects. International Journal of Construction Management 10(3):29–44, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2010.10773148
Marzouk M, El-Mesteckawi L, El-Said M (2011) Dispute resolution aided tool for construction projects in Egypt. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 17(1):63–71, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2011.554165
McKinsey (2021) Selecting infrastructure projects for the next normal Opricovic S (2011) Fuzzy VIKOR with an application to water resources planning. Expert Systems with Applications 38(10):12983–12990, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.097
Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal ofOperational Research 156(2):445–455, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
Parliament of England and Wales and Northern Ireland (2001) Arbitration Act 1996, United Kingdom
Qu Y, Cheung SO (2013) Experimental evaluation of logrolling as an effective mediating tactic in construction project management. International Journal of Project Management 31(5):775–790, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.05.003
Rogulj K, Jajac N (2018) Achieving a construction barrier-free environment: Decision support to policy selection. Journal of Management in Engineering 34(4):04018020, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000618
Rostamzadeh R, Govindan K, Esmaeili A, Sabaghi M (2015) Application of fuzzy VIKOR for evaluation of green supply chain management practices. Ecological Indicators 49:188–203, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.045
Sahu AK, Datta S, Mahapatra SS (2016) Evaluation and selection of resilient suppliers in fuzzy environment: Exploration of fuzzy-VIKOR. Benchmarking: An International Journal 23(3):651–673, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2014-0109
Sarısözen MS (2010) Uyuşmazlıkların Alternatif Çözüm Yollari Işığında Avukatlık Hukukunda Uzkaştırma, Selçuk Üniversitesi, 1–293
Saseendran A, Bigelow BF, Rybkowski ZK, Jourdan DE (2020) Disputes in construction: Evaluation of contractual effects of consensus DOCS. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 12(2):04520008, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000377
Tanrıver S (2006) Hukuk Uyuşmazlıkları Başlamında Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları ve özellikle Arabuluculuk. TBB Dergisi 64:151–178
Thompson RM, Vorster MC, Groton JP (2000) Innovations to manage disputes: DRB and NEC. Journal of Management in Engineering 16(5):51–59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2000)16:5(51)
Valmohammadi C (2010) Using the analytic network process in business strategy selection: A case study. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 4(10):5205–5213
Van Zyl C, Verster B, Ramabodu S (2010) Dispute Resolution alternatives: Problems, Preference and Process. Construction, Building and Real Estate Research Conference (COBRA) of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), 513–526
Vanegas LV, Labib AW (2001) Application of new fuzzy-weighted average (NFWA) method to engineering design evaluation. International Journal of Production Research 39(6):1147–1162, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540010023592
Yiu TW, Lee HK (2011) How do personality traits affect construction dispute negotiation? Study of big five personality model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 137(3):169–178, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000271
Acknowledgments
Not Applicable
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cevikbas, M., Okudan, O. & Işık, Z. Determination of the Most Appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods for Airport Projects: A Fuzzy VIKOR Approach. KSCE J Civ Eng 27, 3192–3203 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-023-1864-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-023-1864-4