Using Analytic Hierarchy Process to Evaluate the Priority for Promoting the Reuse of Construction Waste

• Main Authors: Chih-Yuan Tan, 譚智元
• Other Authors: Tzu-Yi Pai
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/89398970711990656763

碩士 === 朝陽科技大學 === 環境工程與管理系碩士班 === 98 === In this study, a pre-test questionnaire was first developed on the basis of previous literature. Items in this questionnaire were designed using a Likert five-point scale (ranging from very unimportant, unimportant, normal, important to very important). After analysis and modification of key factors and criteria, a hierarchical structure of “promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes” was constructed. This structure involved 4 key elements and 16 criteria. An AHP questionnaire was later developed based on these elements and criteria. Through analysis, common views shared by respondents were gathered and organized to derive research results, which could be a reference for the government on the promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes. This study made use of pair-wise comparison in AHP and selected a valid questionnaire through test of consistency to control the reliability of the obtained results. By assessing the relative weight of each criterion, it constructed a system of weighted criteria to provide related organizations with some valuable information. The analysis results are presented as follows: 1. Among the key elements of the promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes, the “system aspect” is the most important (0.316), followed by the “management guidance aspect” (0.240), the “environmental and social aspect” (0.231), and the “technical aspect” (0.201). 2. In the “system aspect”, the analysis result suggests that “enforcement of use of recycled materials in public constructions” (0.294) is the most important, followed by “increase in local control of construction wastes” (0.253), “inclusion of construction mixture in the control policy” (0.222), and “the government’s proactive investment in recovery of construction wastes as useful resources” (0.221). 3. In the “management guidance aspect”, the analysis result suggests that “proactive intervention in the management of waste processing places and reused products” (0.276) is the most important, followed by “improvement of resource and recycling market mechanism” (0.266), “construction of an online application and report system” (0.233), and “research of the quality standards and specifications of reused products to increase market demands” (0.214). 4. In the “technical aspect”, the analysis result indicates that “setting up programs to promote use of recycled resources in green constructions” (0.264) is the most important, followed by “promotion of techniques and mechanisms for recycle and reuse of construction wastes” (0.257), “improvement of technical principles, facilities, and equipment for reusing construction wastes” (0.243), and “promotion of planning of construction waste items to be reused”. 5. In the “environmental and social aspect”, the analysis result indicates that “promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes to reduce environmental damage” (0.312) is the most important, followed by “improvement of the recycle and reuse rate of construction wastes to avoid excessive cost of recycle and reuse” (0.261), “increase of public acceptance of recycled and reused products” (0.248), and “promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes for better environmental, resource, social, and economic development” (0.169). 6. Through weighting and ranking of the criteria, the top five prioritized criteria are “promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes to reduce environmental damage” (0.312), “promotion of techniques and mechanisms for recycle and reuse of construction wastes” (0.257), “construction of an online application and report system” (0.233), “inclusion of construction mixture in the control policy” (0.222), and “increase of public acceptance of recycled and reused products” (0.248). Among these criteria, “promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes to reduce environmental damage” was ranked either first or second by all the four groups of respondents. It was viewed as the most important by three groups of them, including “expert”, “environmental protection department of the city/county government”, and “community citizens”, and the second important by those in the “architecture industry”. Therefore, it can be inferred that “reduction of environmental damage” is the most important factor that should be considered in the promotion of recycle and reuse of construction wastes, as this factor is also highly emphasized by the expert group.