The choice of thermal insulation technology for existing building retrofit can be a complex multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem characterized by multiple stakeholders with conflicting interests. The conflicting interests of the building owners and the policymakers could negatively influence the adoption of low-carbon energy retrofit measures by building possessors, slowing down the progress toward sustainable development. The investigation of this issue is, therefore, crucial to support more informed decisions and offer policymakers useful insights to develop future economic incentives for energy refurbishment of buildings. Most of the existing MCDM studies on the subject do not emphasize the differences among different stakeholders nor consider the outcomes' robustness. To overcome this gap, this paper integrates multi-stakeholder analyses and robustness assessments to provide broad-spectrum and reliable results. An innovative robust MCDM framework for building thermal insulation under conflicting stakeholder interests is proposed and tested on a real case study building (located in Southern Italy) using building dynamic energy simulation. Several alternatives of thermal insulation are evaluated under environmental, energy, and economic key performance indicators (KPIs). The Analytic Hierarchy Process is used to define criteria weights for conflicting decision-makers representing collectivity (policymakers) and private interests. TOPSIS, VIKOR, WASPAS, and MULTIMOORA methods are integrated to perform initial rankings of the alternatives. A rank similarity analysis is performed to evaluate the consensus between MCDM methods, and an ensemble ranking is obtained for each decision-maker using an approach based on the half-quadratic theory. A Confidence Index and a Trust Level are used to evaluate the agreement among the MCDM approaches, verifying the reliability of the final ensemble ranking. The robustness of the framework is attained by complying with well-established literature guidance. The hybrid MCDM analysis showed that porous materials like expanded clay and expanded perlite lead to better results under the KPIs investigated. The worst performances are attained by vacuum insulation panels and aerogel, mainly due to high values of embodied CO2 emissions and long payback periods. Insights upon the performance of different thermal insulating alternatives are also highlighted by the study and a stakeholder comparative analysis demonstrates that global rankings obtained for the different decision-makers show some similarities, but also important deviations, and a full compromise solution is not achieved.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 51 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.