Table 7: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model for stakeholder satisfaction with MIC projects First-class Weight Second-class Index Weight Membership Function for Each Major Concern Index Very dis- Dis- Basically Satisfied Very satisfied satisfied satisfied satisfied [0,1) [1,2) [2,3) [3,4) [4,5) (U) (A) (a) Overall Satisfaction Availability of amenities, community and 0.00 0.23 0.53 0.20 0.04 u1: a1=0.27 u11: satisfaction of general welfare facilities and provision of public of MIC public open space stakeholders Access to work and locations of activities 0.00 0.05 0.11 0.49 0.35 u12: (S) Availability of local job opportunities 0.00 0.09 0.42 0.36 0.13 u13: Satisfaction Economic benefits to government and 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.48 0.37 u2: a2=0.25 u21: of local citizens government Adaptability of development to the 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.37 0.35 u22: departments changing needs Harmonious development of different 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.37 0.39 u23: local economic activities Compensation and relocation plan/strategy 0.00 0.09 0.37 0.37 0.17 u24: Satisfaction Green and sustainable design and 0.00 0.20 0.58 0.22 0.00 u3: a3=0.21 u31: of pressure construction groups Value-for-money of the proposed 0.09 0.35 0.49 0.07 0.00 u32: project(s) Conservation of local cultural and 0.09 0.42 0.44 0.05 0.00 u33: historical heritage Satisfaction Compensation and relocation plan / 0.02 0.15 0.60 0.23 0.00 u4: a4=0.27 u41: of project strategy affected Building design in terms of aesthetics, 0.00 0.19 0.55 0.26 0.00 u42: groups density, height and visual permeability Unique local characters 0.02 0.15 0.60 0.23 0.00 u43: Creation of a safe, convenient, 0.00 0.13 0.42 0.34 0.11 u44: comfortable and legible pedestrian circulation and transport network
Table 7: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model for stakeholder satisfaction with MIC projects First-class Index (U) Weight (A) Second-class Index Weight (a) Membership Function for Each Major Concern Very dis- satisfied [0,1) Dis- satisfied [1,2) Basically satisfied [2,3) Satisfied [3,4) Very satisfied [4,5) Overall satisfaction of MIC stakeholders (S) u1: Satisfaction of general public a1=0.27 u11: Availability of amenities, community and welfare facilities and provision of public open space 0.00 0.23 0.53 0.20 0.04 u12: Access to work and locations of activities 0.00 0.05 0.11 0.49 0.35 u13: Availability of local job opportunities 0.00 0.09 0.42 0.36 0.13 u2: Satisfaction of government departments a2=0.25 u21: Economic benefits to government and local citizens 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.48 0.37 u22: Adaptability of development to the changing needs 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.37 0.35 u23: Harmonious development of different local economic activities 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.37 0.39 u24: Compensation and relocation plan/strategy 0.00 0.09 0.37 0.37 0.17 u3: Satisfaction of pressure groups a3=0.21 u31: Green and sustainable design and construction 0.00 0.20 0.58 0.22 0.00 u32: Value-for-money of the proposed project(s) 0.09 0.35 0.49 0.07 0.00 u33: Conservation of local cultural and historical heritage 0.09 0.42 0.44 0.05 0.00 u4: Satisfaction of project affected groups a4=0.27 u41: Compensation and relocation plan / strategy 0.02 0.15 0.60 0.23 0.00 u42: Building design in terms of aesthetics, density, height and visual permeability 0.00 0.19 0.55 0.26 0.00 u43: Unique local characters 0.02 0.15 0.60 0.23 0.00 u44: Creation of a safe, convenient, comfortable and legible pedestrian circulation and transport network 0.00 0.13 0.42 0.34 0.11
54405_Authors_Final_Version.docx