Significance and Use
The AHP method allows you to generate a single measure of desirability for project alternatives with respect to multiple attributes (qualitative and quantitative). By contrast, life-cycle
cost (Practice E917 ), net savings (Practice E1074 ), savings-to-investment ratio (Practice E964 ), internal rate-of-return (Practice E1057 ), and payback (Practice E1121 ) methods all
require you to put a monetary value on benefits and costs in order to include them in a measure of project worth.
Use AHP to evaluate a finite and generally small set of discrete and predetermined options or alternatives. Specific AHP applications are ranking and choosing among alternatives. For example,
rank alternative building locations with AHP to see how they measure up to one another, or use AHP to choose among building materials to see which is best for your application.
Use AHP if no single alternative exhibits the most preferred available value or performance for all attributes. This is often the result of an underlying trade-off relationship among
attributes. An example is the trade-off between low desired energy costs and large glass window areas (which may raise heating and cooling costs while lowering lighting costs).
Use AHP to evaluate alternatives whose attributes are not all measurable in the same units. Also use AHP when performance relative to some or all of the attributes is impractical, impossible,
or too costly to measure. For example, while life-cycle costs are directly measured in monetary units, the number and size of offices are measured in other units, and the public image of a
building may not be practically measurable in any unit. To help you choose among candidate buildings with these diverse attributes, use AHP to evaluate your alternatives.
Potential users of AHP include architects, developers, owners, or lessors of buildings, real estate professionals (commercial and residential), facility managers, building material
manufacturers, and agencies managing building portfolios.
1. Scope
1.1 This practice presents a procedure for calculating and interpreting AHP scores of a project's total overall desirability when making building-related capital investment decisions.
1.2 In addition to monetary benefits and costs, the procedure allows for the consideration of characteristics or attributes which decision makers regard as important, but which are not
readily expressed in monetary terms. Examples of such attributes that pertain to the selection of a building alternative (and its surroundings) are location/accessibility, site security,
maintainability, quality of the sound and visual environment, and image to the public and occupants.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate
safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
2. Referenced Documents (purchase separately) The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
ASTM Standards
E631 Terminology of Building Constructions
E833 Terminology of Building Economics
E917 Practice for Measuring Life-Cycle Costs of Buildings and Building Systems
E964 Practice for Measuring Benefit-to-Cost and Savings-to-Investment Ratios for Buildings and Building Systems
E1057 Practice for Measuring Internal Rate of Return and Adjusted Internal Rate of Return for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems
E1074 Practice for Measuring Net Benefits and Net Savings for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems
E1121 Practice for Measuring Payback for Investments in Buildings and Building Systems
E1334 Practice for Rating the Serviceability of a Building or Building-Related Facility
E1480 Terminology of Facility Management (Building-Related)
E1557 Classification for Building Elements and Related Sitework--UNIFORMAT II
E1660 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Support for Office Work
E1661 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Meetings and Group Effectiveness
E1662 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Sound and Visual Environment
E1663 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Typical Office Information Technology
E1664 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Layout and Building Factors
E1665 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Facility Protection
E1666 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Work Outside Normal Hours or Conditions
E1667 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Image to the Public and Occupants
E1668 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Amenities to Attract and Retain Staff
E1669 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Location, Access and Wayfinding
E1670 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Management of Operations and Maintenance
E1671 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Cleanliness
E1679 Practice for Setting the Requirements for the Serviceability of a Building or Building-Related Facility
E1692 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Change and Churn by Occupants
E1693 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Protection of Occupant Assets
E1694 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Special Facilities and Technologies
E1700 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Structure and Building Envelope
E1701 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Manageability
E2320 Classification for Serviceability of an Office Facility for Thermal Environment and Indoor Air Conditions
Adjuncts
Discount Factor Tabl Adjunct to Practices , , , , and Available from ASTM International Headquarters. Order Adjunct No. .
ASTM Software Product
MNL 29 Software to Support ASTM : Standard Practice for Applying Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Multiattribute Decision Analysis of Investments Related to Buildings and Building
Systems
Keywords
analytical hierarchy process; building economics; decision analysis; economic evaluation methods; engineering economics; hierarchical methods; investment analysis; multiattribute decision
analysis; multiple criteria decision analysis; multiple objective decision analysis; operations research methods; Analytical hierarchy process (AHP); Building economics; Composite weights for
leaf attributes; Decision analysis; Engineering economics; Hierarchy; Life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis; Multiattribute decision analysis (MADA); Multiple criteria/objective decision analysis;
Nonmonetary attributes; Operational conditions/objectives/principals--buildings;
ICS Code
ICS Number Code 03.100.50 (Production. Production management); 91.010.99 (Other aspects)
DOI: 10.1520/E1765-11
ASTM International is a member of CrossRef.
ASTM E1765
