The purpose of this paper is to propose a variant of superiority and inferiority ranking (SIR) method called SIR‐Grey for determining the location of large‐scale harbour‐front project development.
The study is illustrated with an application example obtained from the Environmental Protection Department of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to demonstrate the concept and application procedure of SIR‐Grey. The strengths and weaknesses of SIR‐Grey are highlighted when compared with the traditional weighted average approach.
The strengths and weaknesses of SIR‐Grey are highlighted when compared with the traditional weighted average approach. Among the strengths, the global comparison scores of SIR‐Grey can give a clearer and easier comprehensible algorithm. Further, the global comparison generated from superiority flows (S‐flows) [S‐flow: A is preferred to A′(AP>A′) or A is indifferent to A′(AI>A′)] and inferiority flows (I‐flows) [I‐flow: A is preferred to A′(AP<A′) or A is indifferent to A′(AI<A′)] can be used to select a solution matching the nature of the problem; e.g. a conservative approach can adopt the ranking from I‐flow because the selected option will have the criteria farthest from the virtual worst site while the ranking from S‐flow can be adopted for an aggressive approach because the final decision will have the criteria closest to the virtual perfect site. Regarding the weaknesses, the major one is the requirement of a full appreciation of the nature of criteria in setting the thresholds and preference structure, which may complicate the application of the model.
This study proposes a variant of SIR method called SIR‐Grey for determining the location of large‐scale harbour‐front project development. This approach can overcome the problem encountered in using other methods which could lead to variation in the final ranking and hence an inconsistent result.
Tam, C. and Tong, T.K.L. (2008), "Locating large‐scale harbour‐front project developments using SIR method with grey aggregation approach", Construction Innovation, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 120-136. https://doi.org/10.1108/14714170810867041
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2008, Emerald Group Publishing Limited