整合AHP-TOPSIS於住宅規劃之永續性評估案例研究

Abstract

在越南等快速都市化的國家，住宅規劃中的永續性整合已成為一項關鍵關切。這些地區的生態風險、空間破碎化與社會差距日益交疊，進一步加劇規劃與發展上的挑戰。然而，當地的規劃實踐往往缺乏結構化且具情境敏感性的工具，以評估不同的發展替代策略。雖然像三重底線（Triple Bottom Line, TBL）與 ISO 37120 等廣受認可的模型提供了重要的概念基礎，但其方法論範疇廣泛，且高度依賴大量數據，使其在鄰里層級的實際應用受限，尤其是在資料稀缺或資源有限的情境中更為明顯。 本研究採用一種整合性的多準則決策方法，結合層級分析法（Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP）與理想解相似度排序法（Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution, TOPSIS），對住宅規劃方案進行系統性的永續性評估。研究從初始的 38 個國際公認的永續性指標中出發，透過專家諮詢並應用 AHP 方法篩選與加權後，最終選出 14 項涵蓋環境、經濟與社會面向的指標。這些指標隨後被用來評估越南北部孟康鎮（Muong Khuong）三個空間發展方案：方案一、方案二與方案三。 評估結果顯示，方案一獲得最高的永續性得分（C_i^*= 0.6146），其次為方案三（C_i^*= 0.5570），而方案二則因其在經濟與服務相關面向的限制而排名最低（C_i^*= = 0.3703）。這些研究發現突顯出 AHP–TOPSIS 方法在住宅規劃中，支援具透明性、在地性與可複製性的永續性評估方面的實用性與可行性。此一方法為規劃人員在新興都市化背景下，致力於將永續性融入住宅發展策略時，提供了一套具體且有效的決策支援工具。

Sustainability integration in residential planning has become a critical concern in rapidly urbanizing countries like Vietnam, where ecological risks, spatial fragmentation, and social disparities increasingly overlap. However, local planning practices often lack structured and context-sensitive tools to evaluate alternative development strategies. Although widely recognized models like the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) and ISO 37120 provide important conceptual foundations, their broad methodological scope and dependence on extensive datasets often limit their practical application at the neighborhood level, particularly in data-scarce or resource-limited settings. This study adopts an integrated multi-criteria decision-making method combining the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) to conduct a systematic sustainability evaluation of residential planning alternatives. From an initial pool of 38 internationally recognized sustainability indicators, 14 were selected and weighed through expert consultation using AHP. These indicators spanning environmental, economic, and social dimensions were then used to assess three spatial development options for Muong Khuong town in northern Vietnam: Alternative 1, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3. The evaluation results show that Alternative 1 achieved the highest sustainability score (C_i^* = 0.6146), followed by Alternative 3 (C_i^* = 0.5570), while Alternative 2 ranked lowest (C_i^* = 0.3703) due to limitations in economic and service-related dimensions. These findings highlight the practicality of applying AHP–TOPSIS to support transparent, localized, and replicable sustainability assessment in residential planning. The approach offers a viable decision-support tool for planners seeking to embed sustainability into residential development strategies in emerging urban contexts.