In the ever-evolving landscape of urban development, the evaluation of social housing projects has become a multifaceted challenge. A recent study published in the *Journal of Civil Engineering and Management* (translated from Lithuanian as *Journal of Civil Engineering and Management*) sheds light on how Multi-Criteria Decision Methods (MCDM) are revolutionizing the way we assess and improve social housing projects. Led by Ximena Luque Castillo from the ICITECH, Department of Construction Engineering at the Universitat Politècnica de València in Spain, the research offers a comprehensive review of 93 articles published between 1994 and 2025, providing valuable insights into the trends and advancements in this critical field.
The study highlights the complexity of evaluating social housing projects, which involves considering multiple factors and dimensions to address contemporary urbanization challenges and foster more resilient and sustainable communities. “The evaluation process is not just about cost and time anymore,” explains Luque Castillo. “It’s about creating a holistic approach that includes environmental, social, economic, and technical aspects.”
One of the significant trends identified in the research is the prevalence of crisp number-based approaches, which have been widely used in the past. However, the study also notes the emergence of modern techniques such as fuzzy logic and neutrosophic logic, which are gaining traction in the field. These advanced methods allow for a more nuanced and flexible evaluation process, taking into account the uncertainties and ambiguities inherent in social housing projects.
Among the most widely used MCDM methods are AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) and TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution), both pioneering methods that have stood the test of time. “AHP and TOPSIS have been instrumental in helping us make informed decisions,” says Luque Castillo. “They provide a structured approach to evaluating complex projects, ensuring that all relevant factors are considered.”
The study also emphasizes the increasing focus on sustainability in project evaluation. This shift towards sustainability encompasses not just environmental concerns but also social and economic aspects, reflecting a broader understanding of what it means to create truly sustainable communities. “Sustainability is no longer a buzzword,” notes Luque Castillo. “It’s a fundamental consideration in the evaluation of social housing projects, and it’s here to stay.”
The research serves as a guide for incorporating multi-criteria evaluation strategies to improve constructability, especially in social housing projects. By taking sustainability into consideration, developers and policymakers can make more informed decisions that lead to better outcomes for communities and the environment.
The implications of this research are far-reaching, particularly for the energy sector. As urbanization continues to accelerate, the demand for sustainable and efficient housing solutions will only grow. The insights provided by this study can help energy companies and developers create more energy-efficient buildings, reduce carbon footprints, and contribute to the development of more sustainable cities.
In conclusion, the study by Luque Castillo and her team offers a timely and valuable contribution to the field of social housing evaluation. By highlighting the trends and advancements in MCDM, the research provides a roadmap for improving the evaluation process and fostering more sustainable and resilient communities. As we look to the future, the insights from this study will be instrumental in shaping the development of social housing projects and the broader urban landscape.