Advertisement

Multicriteria Analysis in the Proposed Environmental Management Regulations for Construction in Aurora, Guayas, Ecuador

  • Christian Zambrano MurilloEmail author
  • Jesús Rafael Hechavarría Hernández
  • Maikel Leyva Vázquez
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 965)

Abstract

Studies have shown that the construction industry is one of the biggest polluters on the planet, so environmental standards must be implemented to minimize its impact. The daily increase in housing is shortening the forests and areas once protected. Due to the increase in demand for housing in Guayaquil, the population has migrated to neighboring cantons acquiring villas in urbanizations. This increase in the real estate sector is not ecologically sustainable because harmful materials are used for the environment and health, in addition to the use of machinery that uses fossil fuel. The objective of this research is to determine what would be the new regulations of environmental management in the building systems for the buildings of “La Aurora” by reviewing the pollutants that throw the materials most used in construction in order to establish the margins of contamination allowed and the means to compensate for the damage created. To determine the new regulations, a scenario analysis combined with neutrosophical cognitive maps and the TOPSIS multicriteria method is used. This c ombination allows analyzing the main scenarios and ordering them according to the multiple dimensions of the problem. Among the proposals to mitigate environmental pollution are the use of less polluting materials in construction, clean energies in the illumination of homes and public spaces as well as the increase of green areas and reforestation programs per m2 of areas dedicated to develop.

Keywords

Human factors in architecture Sustainable urban planning and infrastructure 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to School of Architecture and Urbanism of the University of Guayaquil for the support of esta research.

References

  1. 1.
    Pinto, G.M.C., Pedroso, B., Moraes, J., Pilatti, L.A., Picinin, C.T.: Environmental management practices in industries of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) from 2011 to 2015. J. Clean. Prod. 198, 1251–1261 (2018)  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.07.046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Angel, S.E., Carmona Maya, S.I., Villegas, R.L.C.: Medellín. Fac. of Mines. School of Geosciences and Environment. Environmental Management in Development Projects. National University of Colombia (2001). http://www.sidalc.net/cgi-bin/wxis.exe/?IsisScript=BAC.xis&method=post&formato=2&cantidad=1&expresion=mfn=044718
  3. 3.
    Enshassi, A., Kochendoerfer, B., Rizq, E.: Evaluation of environmental impacts of construction projects. Constr. Eng. J. 29(3), 234–254 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50732014000300002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang, H., Zhai, D., Yang, Y.N.: Simulation-based estimation of environmental pollutions from process construction. J. Clean. Prod. 76, 85–94 (2014)  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2014.04.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gonzalez-Vallejo, P., Munoz-Sanguinetti, C., Marrero, M.: Environmental and economic assessment of dwelling construction in Spain and Chile. A comparative analysis of two representative case studies. J. Clean. Prod. 208, 621–635 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.10.063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leyva-Vazquez, M.: Model helps making decisions based on Fuzzy cognitive maps (2013).  https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1233.8406
  7. 7.
    Leyva-Vazquez, M., Smarandache, F.: Neutrosofía: new advances in the treatment of uncertainty (2018)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ceballos, B., Lamata, M.T., Pelta, D., Sanchez, J.M.: The relative TOPSIS method vs. absolute. Straight 14(2), 181–192 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1109/Chilecon.2015.7404650
  9. 9.
    Sierra Velez, X.: Tools for decision making for mitigation and adaptation to climate change (2017). http://bdigital.unal.edu.co/59132/1/1053792568.2017.pdf
  10. 10.
    Bansal, P., Roth, K.: Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Acad. Manag. J. 43(4), 717–736 (2000).  https://doi.org/10.2307/1556363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Delmas, M.A., Toffel, M.W.: Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Bus. Strat. Environ. 13(4), 209–222 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rugman, A.M., Verbeke, A.: Corporate environmental strategies and regulations: an organizing framework. Strat. Manag. J. 19(4), 363–375 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1002/(ICIS)1097-0266(199804)19:4<363::AID-SMJ974>3.0.CO;2-H
  13. 13.
    Barbieri, J.C.: Environmental Gestão Business CONCEITOS, Models and Tools. Saraiva, São Paulo (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Christmann, P.: Multinational companies and naturally the environment: environmental determinants of overall standardization policy. Acad. Manag. J. 47(5), 747–760 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Delmas, M.A., Toffel, M.W.: Organizational responses to environmental demands: opening the black box. Strat. Manag. J. 29(10), 1027–1055 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Henriques, I., Sadorsky, P.: The determinants of an environmentally responsive firm: an empirical approach. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 30(3), 381–395 (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1996.0026CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Walker, H., Di Sisto, L., McBain, D.: Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain management practices: lessons from the public and private sectors. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 14(1), 69–85 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oliver, C.: Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16(1), 145–179 (1991).  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1991.4279002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Porter, M.E., van der Linde, C.: Toward a new conception of the environment - competitiveness relationship. J. Econ. Perspect. 9(4), 97–118 (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Buysse, K., Verbeke, A.: Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strat. Manag. J. 24(5), 453 (2003).  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer, K.E.: Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 35(4), 259–276 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seroa da Motta, R.: Analyzing the environmental performance of the Brazilian industry sector. Ecol. Econ. 57(2), 269–281 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sharma, S., Vredenburg, H. Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strat. Manag. J. 19(8), 729–753 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199808)19:8<729::AID-SMJ967>3.0.CO,2-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lopez-Gamero, M.D., Molina-Azorín, J.F., Claver-Cortes, E.: The potential of environmental regulation to change managerial perception, environmental management, competitiveness and financial performance. J. Clean. Prod. 18(10/11), 963–974 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.02.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Freeman, R.E., Wicks, A.C., Parmar, B.: Stakeholder theory and “the corporate objective revisited”. Organ. Sci. 15(3), 364–369 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Freeman, R.E.: Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, Boston (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Adegbesan, J.A.: On the origins of competitive advantage: strategic factor markets and heterogeneous resource complementarity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 34(3), 463–475 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMRCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sharma, S., Henriques, I.: Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the industry Canadian forest products. Strat. Manag. J. 26(2), 159–180 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hart, S.L., Sharma, S.: Engaging stakeholders for competitive fringe imagination. Acad. Manag. Exec. 18(1), 7–18 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2004.12691227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Porter, M.E., Kramer, M.R.: Creating shared value. Harv. Bus. Rev. 89(1/2), 62–77 (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liang, W., Yang, M.: Urbanization, economic growth and environmental pollution: Evidence from China. Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. 21, 1–9 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SUSCOM.2018.11.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Zambrano Murillo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jesús Rafael Hechavarría Hernández
    • 1
  • Maikel Leyva Vázquez
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Architecture and UrbanismUniversity of GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador
  2. 2.School of Mathematical and Physical SciencesUniversity of GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador

Personalised recommendations