Explaining Evaluation Criteria for the Architectural Designs Presented to Government Bodies Usingthe AHP Technique

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate of Architecture, Department of Architecture, Borujerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Borujerd, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of Architecture, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Bou Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran (Corresponding Author).

3 Assistant Professor of Architecture, Malayer Branch, Malayer Azad University, Iran.

10.22034/aaud.2021.251096.2333

Abstract

Evaluation of architectural designs is one of the main challenges of architecture. This challenge exists at all architectural levels both in academic and professional communities. Due to the lack of certain and formulated criteria for evaluating the designs, it is clear that objections will be made to the evaluation results which, consequently, confuse designers and contributors. Due to the presence of inherent differences between architecture discipline and other disciplines, there is no scientifically developed mechanism to evaluate architectural designs. Evaluation of architectural designs is generally based on personal tastes, implicit knowledge of the evaluators,and their previous experiences as well as the employers’ expectations of the designs and their orders.  Usingthe analytic hierarchy process (AHP), this research evaluates architectural designs presented to government bodies. This method converts complex issues to a hierarchy of their constituting factors to achieve an appropriate solution that is most proportionate to the intended goals and criteria. On this basis, in the first stage, library studies and questionnaires are used to obtain criteria for evaluating architectural designs presented to government bodies by experts of technical offices.  Then, using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), the criteria were pairwise compared and finally, their relative weights were calculated. In the end, the final score of each of the criteria was assigned toevaluate the designs. According to the findings, since the AHP technique is flexible, simple, and can simultaneously apply quantitative and qualitative criteria, it can be practically used in the evaluation of architectural designs in government bodies.

Keywords

References

Akbarian, Fahime, Ahmad Jamei, and Hamidreza Shoaei. 2016. Application of AHP Hierarchical Analysis Process in Optimal Location of Office Buildings in the city of Shahrood (New Building Technologies Training and Research Center Building of Semnan Province). Specialized Scientific Quarterly of Green Architecture 9(3): 29-40. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/378450
Azemati, Hamidreza, Abdol-Hamid Ghanbaran, and Fatemeh Jam. 2016. Assessment of the gap between the perception and preference of the component of environmental security in neighborhood parks (case example: Tehran SabonPozkhaneh neighborhood parks). Scientific-Research Journal of the Scientific Association of Architecture and Urban Designning of Iran 14(8): 5-16. https://www.isau.ir/article_62061.html
Bostani, Hamidreza, Hossein Rezaei Dolatabadi, and Mostafa Goharifar. 2013. Scenario-based regional designning using analytic hierarchical process. Journal of Geography and Urban-Regional Designning 4(11): 67-84. https://gaij.usb.ac.ir/article_1543.html
Ghodsipour, Seyyed Hassan. 2018. Debates in multi-criteria decision making. Tehran: Amir Kabir University Press.
Hadipour, Hadi, Nematollah Mousavi, and Baha al-din Najafi. 2018. Assessment of sustainability indicators for the preservation of agriculture technology. Agricultural Economics Research Journal 12(3): 41-72. https://elmnet.ir/article/2098060-19402
Hosseini, Mansourehsadat and Mansour AminiLari. 2018. Factors affecting engineering, provision and construction contracts in electricity industry transmission projects. Iranian Energy Scientific Quarterly 22(4): 153-180. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/432132
Hurputlugil, Timuchin. 2018. Analytic Hierarchy process (AHP) as an Assessment Approach for Architectural Design: case study of Architectural Design studi. International Journal of Architecture & Planning 6(2): 217-245.https://iconarp.ktun.edu.tr/index.php/iconarp/article/view/190
Khaira, A., and R. K. Dwivedi. 2018. A State Of the Art Review of Analytical Hierarchy Process. Materials Today Proceedings 5 (2018). 4029-4035. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221478531732936X
Kubler, Sylvain, Jérémy Robert, William Derigent, Alexandre Voisin, and Yves Le Traon. 2016. A state of the art survey & testbed of fuzzy AHP (FAHP) applications. Expert systems with applications 65: 398-422. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0957417416304638
Lang, Jon T. 2001. Creating architectural theory, the role of behavioral sciences in environmental design. Trans. AlirezaAinifar. Tehran: University of Tehran.
Lawson, Bryan. 2014. How designers think: the designing processdemistified. Trans.  Hamid Nadimi. Tehran: ShahidBeheshti University.
Mohammadi Turkmani, Hojat, Alireza Taherkhani, and Sadjad Fallahpour. (2018). Assessment of the ecological potential of Miane city for the ecotourism development using geographic information system. Applied Research Journal of Geographical Sciences 55(19): 215-232. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/403726
Mohammedian Mosammam, Hassan, Mozafar Sarafi, Jamileh Tawakoliniya, and Alisghar Issa-lou. (2015). Prioritization of the pedestrian ways around the Hazrat Masoumeh holy Shrine in Qom city. Bip-Quarterly Journals of Landscape Research 5(3): 47-94. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/358846
Mohammadzadeh, Saeid, Yusof Hejazi, and Abbas Bazargan. 2016. Model for quality guarantee in Iran's higher education system: the views of the members of the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Research and Designing Quarterly in Higher Education 13(3): 85-107. https://www.sid.ir/fa/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=67099
Momeni Hilali, Hadi, and Amir Ahmadpour. 2014. Assessment of operation systems for the sustainability of agricultural activities in Mazandaran province. Journal of Economics and Agricultural Development 2(29): 192-203. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/343644
Mirriahi, Saeid. 2015. Judging architectural design and its consequences. Soffeh 15(42): 86-97. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=64844
Mirriahi, Saeid. 2018. Assessment of design skills in architecture education. Soffeh 19(49): 61-68. https://soffeh.sbu.ac.ir/article_100099_6b9249e1b22849c148e06dc3de4e839b.pdf
Mulliner, Emma, Naglis Malys, and Vida Maliene. 2016. comparative analysis of MCDM Methods for the Assessment of Sustainable Housing Affordability. Omega 59: 146-156. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305048315001243
Nayeb Asl, Seyyed Ramin. 2019. Providing an optimal model of customer relationship management in Keshavarzi Bank by improving the financial situation and profitability using the hierarchical analysis technique. Accounting and Management Perspective Quarterly 3(25): 33-45. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/429690
Nadimi, Hamid. 2019. Assessment of architectural designs. Soffeh 20(50): 19-9. https://soffeh.sbu.ac.ir/article_100387_6b18d02eccfa6ce9c17154a12fa0efba.pdf
Otto, Wayne. 2014. Architecture and critical thinking. Trans. Amina AnjamShoa’. 2014. Tehran: Academy of Art
Ozdemir, Sahika, Yavuz Ozdemir. 2018. Prioritizing store plan alternatives produced with shape grammar using multi-criteria decision – making techniques. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analitics and City Science 45(4): 751-771. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265813516686566
Pastagia, Digant, and Joel E. M. Macwan. (2018). Global Weights of Pre and Post Occupancy Parameters for Residential Green Buildins in Indian Context. GRD journals, Global Research and Development Journal for Engineering/ A Challenge to Technological Development: 11-19. https://www.grdjournals.com/article?paper_id=GRDCF010002
Sameh, Reza., and Abbasali Izadi. 2013. Evaluationmechanism of design in architectural education, proposing a model for process assessment and design evaluation in the interaction between professor and student. Journal of the Scientific Association of Architecture and Urban Designing of Iran 5(8): 1-13. https://www.isau.ir/article_61988.html
Sharifi, Hasan Pasha, and Narges Taleghani. 2012. Research methods in educational and behavioral sciences. Tehran: Rushd Publications.
Si, Jin., Ljiljana Marjanovic-Halburd, Fuzhan Nasiri, and Sarah Bell. 2016. Assessment of Building-Integrated Green Technologies: A Review And case Study on Applications of Multi-criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Method. Sustainable cities and society 27: 106-115. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2210670716301238.
Smith, Albert C., and Kendra Schank Smith. 2015. Developing Your Design Process, Six key concepts for studio. New York: Routledge.
Usman, Ims, Nangkula Utaberta, and Badiossadat Hassanpoor. 2015. Redefining Critique as an Assessment Tools In Architecture Design Studio. Selected Topics in Energy, Environment, Sustainable Development and Lanscaping: 359-364. https://moam.info/queue/redefining-critique-methods-as-an-assessment-tools-in-wseasus_59cf51051723dd89f13c55a5.html
Utaberta, Nangkula, Badiossadat Hassanpoor, and Mohd. Arsyad Bahar. 2013. An Evaluation of Criteria-Based Assessment and Grading in Architecture Design. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 5(2): 346-352. http://i-rep.emu.edu.tr:8080/jspui/bitstream/11129/3168/1/v5-346-352.pdf
Yaghoubi, Aliakbar. 2016. Providing a mechanism using scientific decision-making methods for assessment of architectural competitions. The fifth national conference of applied research in civil engineering, architecture and urban management. Tehran: KhwajaNaseeruddinToosi University of Technology. https://www.academia.edu/37796519
Zebardast, Esfandiar. 2001. Application of analytic hierarchical process in urban and regional designing. Fine Arts Magazine (10): 13-21. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/13793
Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development
Volume 15, Issue 39
September 2022
Pages 17-26

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 October 2020
  • Revise Date: 11 August 2021
  • Accept Date: 26 December 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics