Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing a composite sustainability index for real estate projects using multiple criteria decision making

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing interest in the incorporation of sustainability concerns at different levels of the decision-making process has taken place over the years. This means that firm activity should not be exclusively driven by economic objectives, but also take into account both environmental demands and social needs. It is widely known that business projects are one of the most effective ways to promote change in organizations. For this reason, business projects in the real estate industry are of great importance for countries’ economies, namely due to the significant impact that the real estate sector has on the environment and the society. This paper sought to develop a composite sustainability index for real estate projects by using multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods. After validation, the practical application of our index ranked environmental criteria in first place. These were followed by social criteria and then economic criteria. The results also reveal that the involvement of additional stakeholders can affect the structure of the composite index. Advantages, shortcomings and managerial implications of our proposal are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: Dobrovolskienė and Tamošiūnienė (2015)

Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Antuchevičienė J, Zakarevičius A, Zavadskas E (2011) Measuring congruence of ranking results applying particular MCDM methods. Informatica 22(3):319–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Baležentis A, Štreimikienė D (2013) Integrated sustainability index: the case study of Lithuania. Intelektinė Ekonomika 7(3):289–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Banihashemi S, Hosseini R, Golizadeh H, Sankaran S (2017) Critical success factors (CSFs) for integration of sustainability into construction project management practices in developing countries. Int J Proj Manage 35(6):1103–1119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington J, Brown J, Frame B (2007) Accounting technologies and sustainability assessment models. Ecol Econ 61(2):224–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell S, Morse S (2013) Groups and facilitators within problem structuring processes. J Oper Res Soc 64(7):959–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernoider E, Stix V (2007) A method using weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis for ranking and validity issues in decision making. Comput Oper Res 34:2637–2647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boggia A, Cortina C (2010) Measuring sustainable development using a multi-criteria model: a case study. J Environ Manage 91(11):2301–2306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolis I, Morioka S, Sznelwar L (2017) Are we making decisions in a sustainable way? A comprehensive literature review about rationalities for sustainable development. J Clean Prod 145:310–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J (2012) Sustainability assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Appraisal 30(1):53–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho M, Rabechini R (2017) Can project sustainability management impact project success? An empirical study applying a contingent approach. Int J Proj Manage 35(6):1120–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty S (2011) Applications of the MOORA method for decision making in manufacturing environment. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 54(9/12):1155–1166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Okudan G, Riley D (2010) Sustainable performance criteria for construction method selection in concrete buildings. Autom Constr 19(2):235–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cinelli M, Coles S, Kirwan K (2014) Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment. Ecol Indic 46:138–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl A (2012) Achievements and gaps in indicators for sustainability. Ecol Indic 17:14–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobrovolskienė N (2016) Financial resource allocation in a project portfolio taking into account sustainability considerations. Doctoral dissertation, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU)

  • Dobrovolskienė N, Tamošiūnienė R (2015) An index to measure sustainability of a business project in the construction industry: Lithuanian case. Sustainability 8(1):14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobrovolskienė N, Tamošiūnienė R (2016) Sustainability-oriented financial resource allocation in a project portfolio through multi-criteria decision-making. Sustainability 8(5):485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobrovolskienė N, Tvaronavičienė M, Tamošiūnienė R (2017) Tackling projects on sustainability: a Lithuanian case study. Entrep Sustain Issues 4(4):477–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandes I, Ferreira F, Bento P, Jalali M, António N (2017) Assessing sustainable development in urban areas using cognitive mapping and MCDA. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2017.1358221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Sánchez G, Rodríguez-López F (2010) A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management—application to infrastructure projects in Spain. Ecol Indic 10(6):1193–1201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira F (2016) Are you pleased with your neighborhood? A fuzzy cognitive mapping-based approach for measuring residential neighborhood satisfaction in urban communities. Int J Strateg Prop Manage 20(2):130–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira F, Santos S (2016) Comparing trade-off adjustments in credit risk analysis of mortgage loans using AHP Delphi and MACBETH. Int J Strateg Prop Manage 20(1):44–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira F, Spahr R, Sunderman M (2016) Using multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to assist in estimating residential housing values. Int J Strateg Prop Manage 20(4):354–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti V (2016) From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and multi-attribute value theory: an integrated approach for policy support. Eur J Oper Res 253(2):524–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn PC (1967) Letters to the editor—additive utilities with incomplete product sets: application to priorities and assignments. Oper Res 15(3):537–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galariotis E, Guyot A, Doumpos M, Zopounidis C (2016) A novel multi-attribute benchmarking approach for assessing the financial performance of local governments: empirical evidence from France. Eur J Oper Res 248(1):301–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallopin G (1996) Environmental and sustainability indicators and the concept of situational indicators. A systems approach. Environ Model Assess 1(3):101–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giambona F, Vassallo E (2014) Composite indicator of social inclusion for European countries. Soc Indic Res 116(1):269–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez M (2014) Applying PRiSM methodology in the Canadian construction sector. PM World J 3:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Hak T, Kovanda J, Weinzettel J (2012) A method to assess the relevance of sustainability indicators: application to the indicator set of the Czech Republic’s sustainable development strategy. Ecol Indic 17:46–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatefi S, Torabi S (2010) A common weight MCDA-DEA approach to construct composite indicators. Ecol Econ 70:114–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaklauskas A, Zavadskas E, Radzevicienė A, Ubartė I, Podviezko A, Podvezko V, Kuzminskė A, Banaitis A, Binkytė A, Bucinskas V (2018) Quality of city life multiple criteria analysis. Cities 72:82–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivilä J, Martinsuo M, Vuorinen L (2017) Sustainable project management through project control in infrastructure projects. Int J Proj Manage 35(6):1167–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee C, Zhong J (2015) Construction of a responsible investment composite index for renewable energy industry. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:288–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P (2005) Species associations: the Kendall coefficient of concordance revisited. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 10(2):226–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P (2010) Coefficient of concordance. In: Salkind N (ed) Encyclopedia of research design. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, pp 164–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Liou J, Tzeng G (2012) Comments on “multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview”. Technol Econ Dev Econ 18(4):672–695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mainali B, Silveira S (2015) Using a sustainability index to assess energy technologies for rural electrification. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1351–1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcelino-Sádaba S, González-Jaen L, Pérez-Ezcurdia A (2015) Using project management as a way to sustainability. From a comprehensive review to a framework definition. J Clean Prod 99:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardani A, Jusoh A, Nor K, Khalifah Z, Zakwan N, Valipour A (2015a) Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications—a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Econ Res—Ekonomska Istraživanja 28(1):516–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardani A, Jusoh A, Zavadskas E (2015b) Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications—two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst Appl 42(8):4126–4148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinakis V, Doukas H, Xidonas P, Zopounidis C (2017) Multicriteria decision support in local energy planning: an evaluation of alternative scenarios for the sustainable energy action plan. Omega—Int J Manage Sci 69:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martens M, Carvalho M (2017) Key factors of sustainability in project management context: a survey exploring the project managers’ perspective. Int J Proj Manage 35(6):1084–1102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier J, Munda G, O’Neill J (1998) Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecol Econ 26(3):277–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Gamboa M, Iribarren D, García-Gusano D, Dufour J (2017) A review of life-cycle approaches coupled with data envelopment analysis within multi-criteria decision analysis for sustainability assessment of energy systems. J Clean Prod 150(1):164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marttunen M, Belton V, Lienert J (2017a) Are objectives hierarchy related biases observed in practice? A meta-analysis of environmental and energy applications of multi-criteria decision analysis. Eur J Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.02.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marttunen M, Lienert J, Belton V (2017b) Structuring problems for multi-criteria decision analysis in practice: a literature review of method combinations. Eur J Oper Res 263(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza GA, Prabhu R (2000) Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study. For Ecol Manage 131(1):107–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moldan B, Janoušková S, Hák T (2012) How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: indicators and targets. Ecol Indic 17:4–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardo M, Saisana M, Saltelli A, Tarantola S, Hoffman A, Giovannini E (2008) Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecol Econ 60:498–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom S (2007) Impact assessment procedures for sustainable development: a complexity theory perspective. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(7):645–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Ryan R, Pereira M (2015) Participatory indicators of sustainability for the salmon industry: the case of Chile. Mar Policy 51:322–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Økland A (2015) Gap analysis for incorporating sustainability in project management. Procedia Comput Sci 64:103–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira R, Lopes J, Sousa H, Abreu M (2017) A system for the management of old building retrofit projects in historical centres: the case of Portugal. Int J Strateg Prop Manage 21(2):199–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagell M, Klassen R, Johnston D, Shevchenko A, Sharma S (2015) Are safety and operational effectiveness contradictory requirements: the roles of routines and relational coordination. J Oper Manage 36:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paredes-Gazquez J, Rodriguez-Fernandez J, Cuesta-Gonzalez M (2015) Measuring corporate social responsibility using composite indices: mission impossible? The case of the electricity utility industry. Revista de Contabilidad: Spanish Accounting Review 19(1):142–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel B, Gonzalez E, Barbosa G (2016) Decision-support models for sustainable mining networks: fundamentals and challenges. J Clean Prod 112:2145–2157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintér L, Hardi P, Martinuzzi A, Hall J (2012) Bellagio STAMP: principles for sustainability assessment and measurement. Ecol Indic 17:20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podvezko V (2008) Comprehensive evaluation of complex quantities. Bus Theory Pract 9:160–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podvezko V (2011) The comparative analysis of MCDA methods SAW and COPRAS. Eng Econ 22(2):134–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Report Brundtland (1987) Our common future: report of the world commission on environment and development. Oxford University, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz F, Cabello J, Pérez-Gladish B (2017) Building ease-of-doing-business synthetic indicators using a double reference point approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (1979) Applications of analytical hierarchies. Math Comput Simul 21(1):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez M (2015) Integrating sustainability issues into project management. J Clean Prod 96:319–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shakouri G, Nabaee M, Aliakbarisani S (2014) A quantitative discussion on the assessment of power supply technologies: DEA (data envelopment analysis) and SAW (simple additive weighting) as complementary methods for the “Grammar”. Energy 64(1):640–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siew R, Balatbat M, Carmichael D (2016) A proposed framework for assessing the sustainability of infrastructure. Int J Constr Manage 16(4):281–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvius A (2016) Sustainability as a competence of project managers. PM World J 9:1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvius A, Kampinga M, Paniagua S, Mooi H (2017) Considering sustainability in project management decision making: an investigation using Q-methodology. Int J Proj Manage 35(6):1133–1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh R, Murty H, Gupta S, Dikshit A (2007) Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecol Indic 7(3):565–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh R, Murty H, Gupta S, Dikshit A (2012) An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol Indic 15:281–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triantaphyllon E (2000) Multi-criteria decision making methods: a comparative study. Applied optimization, vol 44. Springer, Boston

  • Turskis Z, Zavadskas E, Peldschus F (2009) Multi-criteria optimization system for decision making in construction design and management. Eng Econ 1(61):7–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Cauwenbergh N, Biala K, Bielders C, Brouckaert V, Franchois L, Cidad V, Hermy M, Mathijs E, Muys B, Reijnders J (2007) SAFE: a hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 120(2):229–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Kerk G, Manuel A (2008) A comprehensive index for a sustainable society: the SSI—the sustainable society index. Ecol Econ 66(2):228–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waas T, Hugé J, Block T, Wright T, Benitez-Capistros F, Verbruggen A (2014) Sustainability assessment and indicators: tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development. Sustainability 6(9):5512–5534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang P, Zhu Z, Wang Y (2016) A novel hybrid MCDM model combining the SAW, TOPSIS and GRA methods based on experimental design. Inf Sci 345(1):27–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xidonas P, Mavrotas G, Hassapis C, Zopounidis C (2017) Robust multiobjective portfolio optimization: a minimax regret approach. Eur J Oper Res 262(1):299–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas E, Turskis Z (2011) Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview. Technol Econ Dev Econ 17(2):397–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas E, Turskis Z, Kildienė S (2014) State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technol Econ Dev Econ 20(1):165–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas E, Bausys R, Kaklauskas A, Ubarte I, Kuzminskė A, Gudienė N (2017) Sustainable market valuation of buildings by the single-valued neutrosophic MAMVA method. Appl Soft Comput 57:74–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou L, Tokos H, Krajnc D, Yang Y (2012) Sustainability performance evaluation in industry by composite sustainability index. Clean Technol Environ Policy 14(5):789–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou H, Yang Y, Chen Y, Zhu J (2018) Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: the origins, development and future directions. Eur J Oper Res 264(1):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Financial Engineering, Faculty of Business Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, 10223, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Nomeda Dobrovolskienė, Rima Tamošiūnienė & Kamilė Taujanskaitė

  2. Department of Construction Management and Real Estate, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, 10221, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Audrius Banaitis & Nerija Banaitienė

  3. ISCTE Business School, BRU-IUL, University Institute of Lisbon, Avenida das Forças Armadas, 1649-026, Lisbon, Portugal

    Fernando A. F. Ferreira

  4. Fogelman College of Business and Economics, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152-3120, USA

    Fernando A. F. Ferreira

  5. Department of Business Technologies and Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Business Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, 10223, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė

  6. BRU-IUL, University Institute of Lisbon, Avenida das Forças Armadas, 1649-026, Lisbon, Portugal

    Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė

Authors
  1. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rima Tamošiūnienė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Audrius Banaitis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fernando A. F. Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nerija Banaitienė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kamilė Taujanskaitė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando A. F. Ferreira.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dobrovolskienė, N., Tamošiūnienė, R., Banaitis, A. et al. Developing a composite sustainability index for real estate projects using multiple criteria decision making. Oper Res Int J 19, 617–635 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0365-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0365-y

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation