Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 19 results ...

Almeida, N, Sousa, V, Alves Dias, L and Branco, F (2010) A framework for combining risk-management and performance-based building approaches. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 74.

Ascione, F, Bellia, L, Mazzei, P and Minichiello, F (2010) Solar gain and building envelope: the surface factor. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 205.

Carbonara, N and Pellegrino, R (2020) The role of public private partnerships in fostering innovation. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 140–56.

Dansoh, A, Frimpong, S and Oppong, G D (2020) Exploring the dimensions of traditional authority influencing stakeholder management at the pre-construction stage of infrastructure projects. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 189–206.

Eriksson, P, Milić, V and Brostrom, T (2019) Balancing preservation and energy efficiency in building stocks. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 356–73.

Februandari, A (2019) Authenticity in cultural built heritage: learning from Chinese Indonesians’ houses. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 262–78.

Gram-Hanssen, K (2010) Residential heat comfort practices: understanding users. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 86.

Leiringer, R and Schweber, L (2010) Managing multiple markets: big firms and PFI. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 43.

Lucke, T and Beecham, S (2010) Capacity loss in siphonic roof drainage systems due to aeration. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 17.

Narbaev, T, De Marco, A and Orazalin, N (2020) A multi-disciplinary meta-review of the public–private partnerships research. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 109–25.

Organ, S (2019) The opportunities and challenges of improving the condition and sustainability of a historic building at an international tourist attraction in the UK. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 329–55.

Pu, W, Xu, F, Chen, R and Marques, R C (2020) PPP project procurement model selection in China: does it matter?. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 126–39.

Rose, T and Manley, K (2010) Motivational misalignment on an iconic infrastructure project. Building Research & Information, 38(02), 56.

Sharma, M and Lee, A (2019) Dementia-friendly heritage settings: a research review. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 279–310.

Tavakoli, N and Hosseini Nourzad, S H (2020) Win-win pricing method for BOT projects using a simulation-based evolutionary optimization. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 157–71.

Tunefalk, M, Legner, M and Leijonhufvud, G (2019) Long-term effects of additional insulation of building façades in Sweden. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 374–85.

van der Meer, J, Hartmann, A, van der Horst, A and Dewulf, G (2020) Multi-criteria decision analysis and quality of design decisions in infrastructure tenders: a contractor’s perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 38(02), 172–88.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Decision quality; trade-off; decision-making; infrastructure tender; multi-criteria decision analysis;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0144-6193
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2019.1577559
  • Abstract:
    Design decision-making in infrastructure tenders is a challenging task for contractors due to limited time and resources. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) promises to support contractors in dealing with this challenge. However, the ability of MCDA to ensure decision quality in the specific context of infrastructure tenders has gained little attention. By undertaking a longitudinal case study on early design decisions in a tender for a design-build project in the Netherlands the relationship between MCDA and decision quality is investigated. The case results show that in the early tender phase the decision making very much relies on the experience and knowledge of engineers. If MCDA is inappropriately used in such a context it can create impressions of soundly underpinned evaluations of design options while neglecting uncertainties and leading to low-quality decision. Although MCDA defines the “what” is required for structuring the decision problem, it does not support decision-makers in the “how” to do it. The explicit consideration of decision quality elements in MCDA can support the “how” and can create awareness for decision makers concerning importance, scope and uncertainty of criteria.

Whitman, C J, Prizeman, O, Walker, P and Gwilliam, J A (2019) Heritage retrofit and cultural empathy; a discussion of challenges regarding the energy performance of historic UK timber-framed dwellings. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 386–404.

Zahari, N F, Che-Ani, A I, Abdul Rashid, R B, Mohd Tahir, M A and Amat, S (2019) Factors contribute in development of the assessment framework for wheelchair accessibility in National Heritage Buildings in Malaysia. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 38(02), 311–28.