Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran

Hossein Meiboudi a, *, Akramolmolok Lahijanian a, Seyed Mohammad Shobeiri b,
Seyed Ali Jozi c, Reza Azizinezhad d
a
Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
b
Department of Environmental Education, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
c
Department of Environment, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
d
College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Many assessment systems for green schools exist to guide schools toward environmentally responsible
Received 23 October 2015 choices. To identify a nation's green schools, an assessment system must be developed for their selection.
Received in revised form When green school standards are lacking, measures must be created, including an information model
31 January 2016
enabling decision makers to recognize these schools. The aim of this study is to create an integrative
Accepted 1 February 2016
system for assessing green schools in Iran and to develop scientific support in school selection, in order
Available online xxx
to avoid hasty choices and to respect the selection of these schools. In this study, by using fuzzy multi-
criteria decision making methods, the criteria of green schools have been gauged across 6 criteria and 15
Keywords:
Green school
sub-criteria, using a consistent testing methodology. This renders paired comparisons more reliable.
Assessment Ghazanfari and Mikhailov methods were utilized. To evaluate practical applications, the developed
Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process criteria were used in assessing 5 selected green schools in Tehran. The integrative assessment system
Fuzzy technique for order of preference by with proposed criteria showed that green schools 5, 3, 4, 1 and 2, respectively, have earned first to fifth
similarity to ideal solution rank in terms of proposed criteria for green schools. Establishing an assessment system and its appli-
Iran cation through methodology limits incorrect choices, removes the green schools' selection from the
domain of non-specialists, restrains subjective methods, and puts selection into the hands of pro-
fessionals and specialists with scientific support. Due to the need to communicate effectively, to engage
experts and to address the complexity involved in the assessment system for green schools, the proposed
integrative system was designed to assess green schools.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Under such circumstances, environmental issues have only

Current environmental problems are rooted in the lack of proper
awareness and cultural weakness regarding the relationship be-
tween man and nature. A wide range of environmental education
opportunities have been incorporated in the curricula in schools
worldwide (Hens et al., 2010). Effective school programs should not
only help students to progress the knowledge, attitudes and skills
necessary for responsible environmental behavior, but also have
the potential to spread awareness of the concept (Cin ^ ^cera and
Krajhanzl, 2013; Zhao et al., 2015).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ98 51 33870315.
E-mail addresses: links.state@gmail.com (H. Meiboudi), lahijanian@hotmail.com
(A. Lahijanian), sm_shobeiri@pnu.ac.ir (S.M. Shobeiri), sajozi@yahoo.com (S.A. Jozi),
r.azizi@srbiau.ac.ir (R. Azizinezhad).
belatedly been recognized in school activities worldwide (Hens
et al., 2010). In 1992, twenty years after the Stockholm Confer-
ence, the Rio Conference was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The
result was the preparation of a charter entitled Agenda 21. Ac-
cording to Agenda 21, “(Principle 22) ... local communities have a
vital role in environmental management and development because
of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recog-
nize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and
enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustain-
able development” (UN, 1993). Furthermore, Chapter 36.3 of
Agenda 21 states, “Education is critical for promoting sustainable
development and improving the capacity of the people to address
environment and development issues” (UN, 1993).
In response to this statement, green school efforts have been
initiated worldwide. For instance, the International Eco-Schools
program was started by the International Foundation for

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
0959-6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
2 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
Environmental Education (FEE) in 1994 (FEE, 2015). The program
offers a flexible approach for schools to implement an Environ-
mental Management System (EMS), the so-called 7 steps, based on
EMAS/ISO 14001 standards (To €nük and Kayihan, 2013). The world
system refers to the integrated aspects of an organization (Hens
et al., 2010). Green school, also known as Eco-Schools, have a
range of beneficiaries, including managers, teachers, families, stu-
dents, and school personnel, and provide training with a focus on
students, particularly where they adopt an integrative system for
sustainable development that embraces activity, curriculum,
building, and research. A similar study was conducted by Hens et al.
(2010). With the aid of universities, EMSs were developed and
implemented in 39 primary schools in northern Gauteng and
southern Limpopo provinces, South Africa. Between 2006 and
2008, the supporting universities monitored the implementation
process to evaluate the progress the schools made in environ-
mental management and performance. The monitoring results
exposed the main parameters, which led to development of the
environmental performance of the schools. These results can be
used to improve the process of EMS implementation in the future.
Lozano et al. (2013) analyzed the texts of 11 declarations, charters,
and partnerships developed for higher education institutions,
which can be considered to represent university leaders' intentions
to improve the effectiveness of Education for Sustainable Devel-
opment. Sammalisto and Brorson (2008) at the University of Ga €vle,
Sweden, indicated that training is a key factor during imple-
mentation of EMS within a university campus.
Similar activities have also taken place in Iran. For instance, in
2009, the headquarters of the Tehran Municipality's Environment
and Sustainable Development, in collaboration with a nongovern-
mental organization, the World Green Star, led environmental ed-
ucation projects in green schools. Finally, after several revisions in
FEE's Foundation Council, on 31 December 2010, Iran was selected
as the 69th member of the Foundation (Shobeiri et al., 2014). Now,
in Iran, green schools are those that complete the verification
process with the World Green Star organization, and receive their
licenses.
Today, the green school assessment system in Iran tended on a
single target, such as furthering the development of green schools
through networking, and commending those schools that were
willingly contributing to environmental education by citing them
as green schools. Such a lack of integrated efforts takes a serious toll
on their commitment to further green their schools and may result
in ineffectual and inefficient implementation of their planned tar-
gets. Therefore, it is necessary to create an integrative assessment
system for green schools in Iran.
The present assessment system for green schools in Iran raises
several questions, which should be addressed in determining
which schools are indeed green schools. Are these schools actually
green schools? What are the differences in quality among green
schools? At what point would the quality differences become so
consequential that a lesser school could not be considered a green
school? What meanings does the specification, green schools,
convey?
An integrative assessment system for green schools' problems
frequently involves a complex decision-making process in which
multiple criteria and uncertain conditions must simultaneously be
considered. Measuring and operationalizing the various features of
readiness are complex and inherently imprecise, as they involve
subjective conditions and information, linguistic assessments, and
multiple and conflicting criteria. The multi-dimensional essence of
an integrative assessment system for green schools justifies the use
of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods.
An often-cited definition of uncertainty, given by Hunter and
Goodchild (1993) is, “the degree to which the lack of knowledge
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
about the amount of error is responsible for hesitancy in accepting
the results and seeing without caution.” Sources of uncertainty
contain both vagueness and ambiguity. Vagueness characterizes
data that lack clarity, and ambiguity characterizes data with several
overlapping values. While vague data are uncertain because they
lack detail or carefulness, ambiguous data are uncertain because
they are subject to multiple explanations. An integrative assess-
ment system for green schools' problems involves ambiguity and
vagueness, and fuzzy sets theory has been widely used to handle
imprecise and ambiguous data in MCDM.
Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is a well-known decision
support tool used for complex decision-making by providing a
multi-level hierarchical structure for discrete decision-making
problems.
This study uses FAHP with consistent testing methodology and
FTOPSIS in order to establish the scientific support for and rational
approach to the selection and creation of green schools for Iran.
TOPSIS has also found wide use in decision-making applications
over the past few decades (Tavana et al., 2013).
The motivations for the concatenation of AHP with TOPSIS in
this study are threefold: 1) the concepts of positive ideal solution
and negative ideal solution in TOPSIS are attractive for bench-
marking purposes; 2) using TOPSIS after AHP avoids the predica-
ment that the units under assessment are of the same value and
cannot be properly ranked; and 3) various successful applications
of the integrated AHP-TOPSIS methodology provide guidance in the
literature (see, for example, Pires et al., 2015; Kluczek and Gladysz,
2015; Bai et al., 2016).
Since the field of assessment systems for green schools is varied,
the aim of this study is to clarify that field by an integrative
assessment system for Iran. Facilitating the discovery of potential
green schools is discussed. Furthermore, there is scientific support
in school selection, to avoid hasty choices and to respect the se-
lection of these schools for development. This paper proposes that
an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran and in
the system's current situation be tested. The proposed system will
1) utilize a set of an integrative assessment system for green
schools' criteria that impacts green schools' readiness in a com-
munity; 2) lend importance to the weights of these criteria, with
consistent testing methodology; and 3) provide an overall green
schools' readiness score by incorporating these criteria into an
integrative assessment system and fuzzy system.
This article is organized into 6 sections. In the next section, a
review of the assessment systems for green schools is presented. In
Section 3, research methods and underlying mathematical support
are given. In Section 4, the evaluation framework is proposed. In
Section 5, the pilot study and its findings, as well as limitations and
future research directions are discussed. Finally, Section 6 presents
the conclusions.
2. Assessment systems for green schools
According to the Center for Green Schools at the U.S. Green
Building Council, a “green school” is a school building or facility
that creates a healthy environment conducive to learning as well as
saving energy, resources and money (Lysgaard et al., 2015). To build
a green school, the systems and integrity of the green school must
be fully examined from planning to monomer design, to reduce
costs in the whole life cycle and to bring students from behavioral
awareness to the education significance of green design (Zhao et al.,
2015).
Many assessment systems for green schools exist to guide
schools toward environmentally responsible choices (Henderson
and Tilbury, 2004; Mogensen and Mayer, 2005; Zhao et al., 2015).
These systems are typically comprised of a set of criteria that a
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
green school must meet to earn a score, as well as technical support
and other resources to help participants meet the criteria
(Dautremont-Smith, 2012). The literature on green schools drawn
from many countries reveals that each of the green school schemes
has its own assessment system and unique features (Zeng et al.,
2009). One recent overview of assessment systems for green
schools, both local and national, found over 50 English-language
green school recognition programs and assessment frameworks
(Chan et al., 2015).
Apart from the differences in the agencies responsible for
coordinating green school development in various countries, there
are differences in the orientation and focus of attention in green
school development. Japan, for example, has given more attention
to the development of equipment and school infrastructure in
accordance with green architecture and facilities (Matsumoto and
Daudey, 2014). The Alliance to Save Energy supported the green
school project in the US and encouraged schools to improve their
technical facilities for energy saving and to conduct energy-related
teaching and learning activities (Asdrubali et al., 2015).
Researchers have reported several criteria for evaluating green
schools, which, despite their multiplicity, convincingly converge. In
this research, criteria for selecting green schools were developed
based on 6 categories and their compliance with Iran's conditions.
In this regard, the criteria provided by FEE (FEE, 2015), EMS (Hens
et al., 2010), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) (USGBC, 2009), the US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) (USEPA, 2008), the Collaborative for High Performance
Schools (CHPS) (CHPS, 2004), and Iran's Department of the Envi-
ronment (DOE) (DOE, 2014) were used.
Obviously, criteria proposed by international organizations are
introduced only as a general guideline (Zhao et al., 2015). Wide-
ranging guidance cannot be generalized among unique and var-
ied national circumstances. Some of these criteria may not even be
applicable in some countries due to the lack of necessary conditions
(Datnow, 2005). The existence of a wide range of socioeconomic
and cultural differences is one of the main reasons for providing the
criteria in a general form. Countries considering their own socio-
economic and cultural characteristics must be able to adapt these
criteria from generalities and to their own particular circumstances.
This issue in itself explains the reason for developing practical
identification and selection criteria for green schools in Iran.
In green schools, in addition to teaching environmental pro-
tection programs, the school building itself is considered as one of
the components of environmental education (Day, 2009). The
buildings and learning environment of a green school themselves
promote environmental conservation by involving students and
inspiring them. This leads to the sensitivity to correctly use and
reduce waste in the students' families and subsequently in the
community. This process reveals the role of the learning environ-
ment in promoting culture and education (Cole, 2013). The criteria
introduced below include only those criteria planned for Iran's
green schools. The type and range of criteria, taking into account
socioeconomic and cultural differences of other countries, are
different from the classifications presented above.
Thus 6 criteria and 15 sub-criteria, of which approximately 50%
were engineering-architectural and 50% behavioral as described in
Table 1, were utilized in the integrative assessment of green
schools.
2.1. Engineering-architecture criteria
a) Criterion of building location and position
The physical orientation of school buildings matters. Buildings
facing south are much more effective in utilizing solar energy
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
3
(Pasupathy et al., 2008). Noise pollution matters, too. According to
the National Institute of Standards of America, the hearing standard
in US schools is S12.60 (ANSI, 2002). Singer (2003) states that
hearing problems adversely impact students' learning for two
reasons: they misconceive the teacher's words and misconceive the
pronunciation of homophones and consonants.
Orr says innovations in the environmentally friendly architecture
of new educational buildings are important (Orr, 1994). Daylight
plays a role in children's learning. A study from Heschong Mahone
Group (2003) showed that elementary students in a class with
maximum brightness have 21% more learning progress compared to
students in classes with the lowest brightness. This result indicates
the importance of design and architecture of schools and suggests
that daylight has a positive and important impact on students'
learning. This leads to greater energy efficiency and cost savings in
schools (Nicklas and Bailey, 2012). The criterion of building location
and condition refers to the 3 components of building orientation,
noise pollution, and design and architecture criterion.
b) Indoor air criterion
Indoor air quality contributes to overall indoor environmental
quality (Dougan and Damiano, 2003). Measurements for indoor air
quality mean specifying acceptable levels of air pollutants, such as
volatile organic compounds, carbon dioxide, and other pollutants
including pathogens and allergens, such as viruses, bacteria, fungi,
and molds. The first way to prevent these pollutants is to identify
their source in the school, such as wet areas, radiator construction
materials, or some cleaners and disinfectants (Gordon, 2010). Low
indoor air quality can cause respiratory problems and student
absenteeism. Moreover, if air ventilation is poor, students will
suffer from headaches, drowsiness, and loss of concentration
(Smedje and Norback, 1999).
Thermal comfort is also important. Wargocki et al. (2005), in a
study of ten-year-old children, reduced the classroom temperature
from 23.6  C to 20  C for a week and increased the external air
source (fresh air) from 11 to 20.4 cubic feet per minute. He found
that lessons like reading and mathematics improved, concluding
that fresh air and gradual reduction in temperature can improve
children's school lessons.
c) Green space criterion
Ecosystem services support a city's flexible behavior and sus-
tainability (Jabareen, 2013). Because of the great enthusiasm for the
greening of schoolyards and learning outside classrooms, research
in this field has continued since getting underway about two de-
cades ago (Rickinson et al., 2004). The green space criterion refers
only to the components of green space.
2.2. Behavioral criteria
a) Management criterion
This criterion matches the managerial aspects criterion
mentioned in EMS (Hens et al., 2010) and the 7 stages of the
ecological schools plan implementation in FEE (FEE, 2015).
The energy criterion matches the energy and paper organization
criterion (DOE, 2014) and environmental aspects-energy covered in
EMS (Hens et al., 2010). A green school should be efficient and
productive in the fields of energy saving and materials, efficient use
of energy resources, water, and paper, and minimization of solid
waste and produced waste in everyday activities.
The waste criterion is consistent with the recycling criterion
mentioned in LEED (USGBC, 2009), and the criterion of
4 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
Table 1
Eligible school engineering-architecture criteria and behavioral criteria in previous studies.
Criteria
Engineering-Architecture A. Location and position of the building
B. Indoor air
C. Green space
Behavioral D. Management
E. Education
F. Participation
environmental aspects-waste discussed in EMS (Hens et al., 2010),
and the waste and purchase criteria of Iran's DOE (DOE, 2014).
Schools are responsible for the energy consumed in people's
commutes to them (USGBC, 2007). Until the present, there had
been relatively little attention to the study of the overall energy
consumption effects of transportation to school, although this en-
ergy consumption is considerable and can be discernable in
greenhouse gas emissions. A survey conducted in 2006 in the
United States found that only 7.6% of 424 surveyed training centers
encouraged the use of clean transportation and had policies or
programs such as walking and biking to school (Elzeyadi, 2012). The
management criterion refers to the 4 components of managerial
aspects, namely energy criterion, waste criterion, and the design
and transportation criteria.
b) Criterion of education
Environmental education is the most fundamental way to pro-
tect the environment, teaching children and adults the best
methods to provide content, activities, and structural imple-
mentation to raise environmental awareness (Meiboudi, 2013). In
this way, each person in society deems him/herself responsible to
preserve and protect the environment by respecting nature (Power,
2015).
This criterion complies with the criterion of collateral aspects,
discussed in EMS (Hens et al., 2010). According to the mentioned
references, this criterion is associated with EMSs in schools. Their
attitude includes interest or disinterest and support or disregard
(Zhu, 2015). The criterion of education refers to the 3 components
of environmental education, environmental activities, and attitude
criterion.
c) Participation criterion
Participation of school students in environmental decision
making should be considered a key prerequisite to the success of
^ ^
green schools (Cin cera and Krajhanzl, 2013). In green schools,
students learn to interact and participate in solving environmental
challenges and eventually become citizens who share an approach
aligned with the environment. The participation criterion refers to
2 components of participation in school and participation outside
school.
3. Research methods
The present study's goal is an applied one, in terms of both
technique and data gathering for a descriptive survey. This study
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
Sub-criteria Authors (year)
A1. Building orientation USGBC (2009), USEPA (2008), CHPS (2004)
A2. Noise pollution
A3. Design and architecture
B1. Air quality USGBC (2009), USEPA (2008), CHPS (2004)
B2. Thermal comfort
C1. Green space Hens et al. (2010), FEE (2015), USGBC (2009)
D1. Management features Hens et al. (2010), FEE (2015), DOE (2014)
D2. Energy
D3. Waste management
D4. Transportation
E1. Environmental education Hens et al. (2010), FEE (2015)
E2. Environmental activities
E3. Attitude
F1. Participation in school FEE (2015), DOE (2014)
F2. Participation outside school
uses fuzzy AHP (FAHP) with consistent testing methodology and
Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal So-
lution (FTOPSIS) to establish the scientific support for and rational
approach to the creation and selection of green schools for Iran.
The criteria required to evaluate green schools were determined
according to the world's relevant criteria and by their compliance
with national conditions and the quantification of any criterion.
Limited criteria aids analysis was utilized, due to the higher
applicability of the criteria and the ease of use of each criterion by
the assessors. This guaranteed the efficiency and practicality of the
use of each criterion. The criteria were then given to experts and
better defined with the aid of their comments. The concepts of
fuzzy set theory, the related analytical tools, and data collection and
questionnaire design are briefly illustrated in the following
subsections.
3.1. Fuzzy set theory
The establishment and management of green schools require an
array of decisions. Independence in decision making and reliance
upon the input of experts are critical. A framework bringing
together all the issues is needed. Significant decisions must be
given priority over those less critical. Therefore, in the context of
decision making, educators can call upon fuzzy set theory in
ordering and making their determinations.
Professor Zadeh (1965) used fuzzy theory, including uncertainty
and ambiguity, in solving problems (Rostamzadeh and Sofian,
2011). Zadeh recognized the importance of decision making
frameworks. In this study, triangular fuzzy numbers such as ae
(l1,m1,u1) show that l  m  u, as Fig. 1 shows. The membership
functions are displayed as follows (Büyüko € zkan et al., 2011):
The diagram represents the triangular fuzzy numbers, indi-
cating the informed educators' preferences. The functional value is
expressed in mA~ ðxÞ:
Fig. 1. The triangular fuzzy numbers.
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11 5

8  
>
> 0 x31 or x_u 8 wi
>
> >  l
>
< x1 >
> wi
ij
wi
1xm   > >
< m l  mij
mA~ ðxÞ ¼ m  1 (1) wi ij ij wi
>
> mij ¼ (4)
>
> ux wi > w
>
: mxu >
>
>
> u  i
um : ij wi wi
 mij
In this study, the broadest possible method for final numbers' uij  mij wi
ranking was investigated, using the fuzzy numbers listed below Using the maxemin approach, the solution can now be deter-
(Chang, 1992). mined by using the constraints intersection with the min operator
A greater degree of probability, a fuzzy triangular number and utilizing the maxemin approach to determine the answer to
ae1 ¼ (l1, m1, u1) of the triangular fuzzy number ae2 ¼ (l2, m2, u2), is the model:
equal to 2 memberships:

~2 > a
Vða ~1 Þ ¼ subyx ½minðma~1 ðxÞ; ma~2 ðyÞÞ (2) Maxl
 :
s:t 
For comparison, given the baseline ae1 and ae2, it is necessary to m  lij lwj  wi þ lij wj  0
 ij 
calculate both the amount V (ae2ae1) and V (ae1ae2). To greater uij  mij lwj þ wi  uij wj  0
likelihood degree of a convex fuzzy number (ae) of K convex fuzzy
number other (aei; i ¼ 1, 2,…,k) as follows is break down (3 P
n
memberships): wk ¼ 1
k¼1 (5)
~a
Vða ~1 ; a
~2 ; …; a
~k Þ ¼ V½ða
~a
~1 Þ; ða
~a
~2 Þ; …ða
~a
~i Þ wk _0; k ¼ 1; 2; …; n; i ¼ 1; 2; …; n  1; j ¼ 2; 3; …; n; j_i
~a
¼ minVða ~1 Þ i ¼ 1; 2; …; k (3) Furthermore, this model can also reveal the incompatibility of
weight factors. Positive values for the l index represent the relative
consistency, while negative values show that fuzzy judgment is
3.2. Fuzzy AHP very inconsistent.

AHP, developed by Saaty (1977, 2000), is one of the most

powerful techniques for multi-criteria decision making. It is
designed to address complex decision making. It is particularly
relevant to group decision making, in the plethora of decisions in
establishing green schools. The Saaty method was introduced in the
late 1970s (Saaty, 1977). AHP analyzes complex combinations and
selects variables based on hierarchical order. Despite the simplicity
and efficiency of this method, it lacks consideration of the inherent
inaccuracy and uncertainty reflected in the perceptions of decision
makers, whose voices are often criticized upon reaching decisions.
The proper way to deal with this uncertainty is a comparison of
expression values using fuzzy sets or figures that carry far less
ambiguity than group thinking. This method first was described by
van Laarhoven and Pedrycz (1983), replacing the triangular fuzzy
numbers in fuzzy spheres that have developed matrices of paired
comparisons.
After much research, Chang (1992) and Wang et al. (2012)
developed the phase space AHP and FAHP methods, respectively.
One of the most important methods in this context is that of
Mikhailov (2003).
3.3. Mikhailov nonlinear fuzzy prioritization method
Mikhailov's basic model was founded on a linear model and
the need for alpha-cut judgments on weights to solve the
model, and then merged to obtain the final weight at different
levels of alpha. He completed his work suggesting that the
continued use of a nonlinear programming model is described in
a number of steps to achieve the weights removed. Suppose the
initial judgment is aeij ¼ (lij, mij, uij). Then weights must be
calculated:
wi
lij   uij
wi
Instead of converting the above, 2 simple linear inequalities can
be used to make any judgment's membership function linear with
respect to w
wi :
i
3.4. Ghazanfari and Nojavan method
The consistency of decision matrices, in certain cases or in a
fuzzy case, has an effect in determining the accuracy of the
compared analysis results. Saaty first raised the issue of compat-
ibility, and he defined the features of full compatibility and
accepted consistency. Critical to many FAHP researchers is pos-
sessing the only current method for adequate weight gain, and
sometimes they have not even mentioned the need to be consis-
tent in matrices in order to achieve certain weights (Leung and
Cao, 2000).
The research of Ghazanfari and Nojavan (2004), based on the
methodology of Leung and Cao (2000), presented a method for
detecting inconsistencies in the fuzzy judgment matrix and
modification. These researchers, considering the scale of Saaty's
pairwise comparisons, show that the numbers in Equation (6)
should be called “points allowed”; that said, judgment is to
accept the form of this collection:
 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
J¼ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9 (6)
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
The researchers' judgments were based on the trapezoidal
method (m, l, u, d). Structural basis for the numbers l, Ө, and л is
present. l represents the distance between m and l; Ө between l
and u; and finally л between u and d.
In this method, it is assumed fuzzy judgment changes the
four elements, while the structure remains constant. Thus the
model strives to minimize changes while exercising judgment
(objective function), to establish the consistency of the weights
provided. Retaining structures, symmetry, and movement in the
authorized areas set by the limitations of the model are as
follows:
XX 0 2
Min Z ¼ Pij lij  lij cði; jÞ2U
i j

Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
6 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11

Step 2: Clear scale matrix decision: In this step, the fuzzy deci-
s:t : sion matrix is converted to a fuzzy clear scale matrix (Re). To achieve
a matrix Re, it is enough to use either Equation (9) or (10) below.
lnð1  dÞLij1  ln wi  ln wj  lnð1 þ dÞUij1 ; cisj Step 3: Create a weight no scale matrix fuzzy Veof the vector Weij
given as input to the algorithm, calculated using Equation (11):
0 1 !
lji ¼ 0 cði; jÞ2U lij mij uij

uij ~r ij ¼ ; ; ~ ¼ ~r
R Cj* ¼ maxi Cij (9)
ij mn
c*j c*j c*j
0 1 !
uji ¼ 0 cði; jÞ2U
lij lj lj ulj
~r ij ¼ ; ; aj ¼ mini aij (10)
cij bij cij
0  
1  lij  9  pij þ qij cði; jÞ2U


~ ¼ ~v
V ~vij ¼ ~r ij $w
~j i ¼ 1; 2; …; m; j ¼ 1; 2; :::; n (11)
ij mn
0 0
uij ¼ lij þ qij cði; jÞ2U Step 4: Define the fuzzy positive ideal (FPIS, Aþ) and negative
ideal phase (FNIS, A). In this study, the fuzzy positive ideal and
0
lij ¼ integer cði; jÞ2U (7) negative ideal phases introduced by Chen (2000) were used:

~vþ ~
j ¼ ð1; 1; 1Þ; vj ¼ ð0; 0; 0Þ
0
lij : New lower judgment after correcting inconsistencies
0 Step 5: Calculate the sum of the distances of each of the com-
uij : New upper judgment after correcting inconsistencies ~1, a
~2
ponents of the fuzzy positive ideal and fuzzy negative ideal if a
d: Deviation from full compliance are 2 fuzzy numbers. Then the distance between these 2 fuzzy
CFij: Element reliability index Rij
numbers is obtained through Equation (12):
Pij: The coefficient of variation in the Rij penalty is calculated
based on CFij. ~1 ¼ ðl1 ; m1 ; u1 Þ
a ~2 ¼ ðl2 ; m2 ; u2 Þ
a

The following equation calculates the amount of fines, given that rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
CFij ¼ CFji:
1h i
~1 ; a
Dða ~2 Þ ¼ ðl2  l1 Þ2 þ ðm2  m1 Þ2 þ ðu2  u1 Þ2 (12)
3
Pij ¼ Pmin þ ðPmax  Pmin ÞCFij (8) Each component of the distance from the positive ideal to the
negative ideal is calculated using Equation (13):
where Pmin and Pmax are determined by the decision maker
(Ghazanfari and Nojavan, 2004). X
n 
dþ
i
¼ d ~vij  ~vþ
j i ¼ 1; 2; …:; m
3.5. Fuzzy TOPSIS j¼1

Hwang and Yoon (1981) introduced the TOPSIS method. The X

n 
basic principle of TOPSIS is that the chosen alternatives should have d
i ¼ d ~vij  ~v
j i ¼ 1; 2; …:; m (13)
j¼1
the shortest distance from the ideal solution and the farthest dis-
tance from the nadir (negative ideal) solution (Yoon and Hwang, Step 6: Calculate the relative closeness to the ith component in
1995). This ranking method is widely used to solve problems, but the positive ideal. In the end, they are ranked in descending order of
has been criticized due to its inability to consider the inherent CCi. The relative closeness of the relationship is defined by Equation
ambiguity in the perceptions of decision makers. Chen (2000) was (14):
able to move the TOPSIS technique into phase space.
Chen's style is used in this study through the following steps: d
i
CCi ¼ i ¼ 1; 2; …; m (14)
Step 1: The fuzzy adaptive matrix formed opinions about the dþ
i
þ d
i
importance of each individual in each of the measures of impor-
tance to green schools. The matrix entries of Xeij are defined as fol- In this study, a decision-making process hierarchy (hierarchy
lows, where Xeij is ith person's view about the jth component of a modeling) is created as a result of the decomposition of the
fuzzy number: decision-making process, the objective of which is to provide for
preferential sequencing of options (Fig. 2). In the end, to evaluate
 
~ ¼ l ;m ;u
X practical applications, the developed criteria were used in assessing
ij ij ij
5 selected green schools in Tehran.
On the other hand, the importance of experts' views and their
weights (as expressed with Weij) is expressed in the fuzzy numbers
below: 4. Proposed framework
 
~ ¼ w ;w ;w
W 4.1. Selection of green school experts and defining the parameters
j j1 j2 j3

Note that in this study, because the same importance is given to

The assessment process begins by evaluating the readiness of
experts' views, Weij for all statistical populations is defined as
green school committee members who have a history of green
follows:
school project experience and related activities in this field. The
~ ¼ ð1; 1; 1Þcj2n committee determines the voting power associated with each
W j
committee member. In this paper, voting power has been assigned

Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
Engineering-
Architecture
A. Location and
position of the B. Indoor air C. Green space
building
B1
A1
B2
A2
A3
Green school 1 Green school 2
Fig. 2. Decision-making process hierarchy modeling.
to each committee member in proportion to total power (where
total power is normalized to 1), according to some prespecified
rule(s). Alternatively, the committee can assign equal weights to
different committee members as they deem appropriate. The
assessment of green schools readiness committee then identifies 6
experts to be evaluated in the assessment process.
In order to identify and define criteria and sub-criteria of green
schools, a deep and wide pattern was built following a literature
search. This study reviewed criteria and sub-criteria of green
schools and their interdependencies by collecting and analyzing
the reports of various researchers. These criteria and sub-criteria
are the work of experts, and their comments were used.
4.2. Formulation of questionnaires and check the compatibility of
the experts' paired judgments
Measures defined in this section for the formulation of ques-
tionnaires were used in the previous step. The questionnaire survey
was developed in 3 parts: 1) paired comparisons criteria of
greening schools (FAHP questionnaire); 2) paired comparisons sub-
criteria of green schools (FAHP questionnaire); and 3) the integra-
tive assessment of green schools readiness in 5 green schools
(FTOPSIS questionnaire). In this study, the surveys for collecting the
experts' opinions were conducted by the researchers themselves.
All participants were contacted by telephone in advance to arrange
the visiting time.
Mikhailov's Model 5, which is essential to the Materials and
Methods Compatibility Matrix for paired design, was solved using
LINGO™ 10 software (Lindo Systems, Inc., Chicago, USA).
4.3. Establishing a compatibility matrix of paired comparisons as
needed and calculate weights' merged matrix
The previous section's matrix, which lacked the proper consis-
tency per the mathematical models of Ghazanfari and Nojavan
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
7
Integrative Assessment
System for Green Schools
Behavioral
D. Management E. Education F. Participation
D1 E1 F1
C1
D2 E2 F2
D3 E3
D4
Green school 3 Green school 4 Green school 5
(2004), was modified and again placed in the weighting. In addi-
tion, weights obtained from the modified questionnaire were
pooled before using the geometric mean (see Equation (7)). In
calculating the weights' engaged matrix, the Mikhailov Model
design utilized green schools' criteria with software using LINGO™
weight and dimensions, respectively. Then the matrices were
normalized and index cij was calculated.
4.4. Calculate the final weights of the sub-criteria and ranking fuzzy
scores
Multiplication by weights of criteria and sub-criteria for green
schools at this stage gave the final weights of the sub-criteria. Ac-
cording to weights of the sub-criteria, the present status of green
schools was evaluated and in the end, the score of the fuzzy final
analysis of green schools related to greening was determined. Final
fuzzy scores of green schools using fuzzy numbers in the rankings
were based on Chang (1992).
5. Pilot study and future research directions
Five green schools in Iran were assessed using the proposed
system with questionnaires distributed among experts. The an-
swers of experts were evaluated by means of a relative dominance
scale arising from transformation of Saaty's original rating scale by
fuzzification of crisp values (Table 2).
The data collection phase included the evaluations of decision
makers to determine the importance of each criterion. Sample data
were obtained from 6 experts with a history of green school project
experience and related education in Iran. This phase was composed
of paired comparison matrices. Selected decision makers evaluated
each criterion with pairwise comparison. The associated evaluation
of these decision makers forms the fuzzy pairwise comparison
matrix data given in Table 3.
8 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11

Table 2 Table 5
Saaty's original rating scale and corresponding fuzzy numbers. The importance weights for criteria and sub-criteria.

Dominance scale/ Corresponding Reverse Reversed Criteria Sub-criteria Weight

linguistic fuzzy number fuzzy
A (0.013) A1. Building orientation 0.102
assessment number
A2. Noise pollution 0.546
1/Equivalence (1, 1, 3) 1/1 (1, 1, 1) A3. Design and architecture 0.351
2 (1, 2, 4) 1/2 (1/4, 1/2, 1) B (0.140) B1. Air quality 0.651
3/Minor dominance (1, 3, 5) 1/3 (1/5, 1/3, 1) B2. Thermal comfort 0.348
4 (2, 4, 6) 1/4 (1/6, 1/4, 1/2) C (0.154) C1. Green space 1.000
5/Strong dominance (3, 5, 7) 1/5 (1/7, 1/5, 1/3) D (0.289) D1. Management features 0.451
6 (4, 6, 8) 1/6 (1/8, 1/6, 1/4) D2. Energy 0.103
7/Very strong dominance (5, 7, 9) 1/7 (1/9, 1/7, 1/5) D3. Waste management 0.406
8 (6, 8, 9) 1/8 (1/9, 1/8, 1/6) D4. Transportation 0.039
9/Absolute dominance (7, 9, 9) 1/9 (1/9, 1/9, 1/7) E (0.220) E1. Environmental education 0.413
E2. Environmental activities 0.361
2, 4, 6, 8 and corresponding fuzzy numbers constitute indirect sorting.
E3. Attitude 0.225
F (0.173) F1. Participation in school 0.661
F2. Participation outside school 0.338
Table 3
Pairwise comparison matrix for sub-criteria under the criterion of location and
position of building A.

A1 A2 A3 nadir green schools readiness score (d(t)) were determined first.

A1 (1, 1, 1) (1/4, 1/3, 1/2)
A2 (2, 3, 4) (1, 1, 1)
A3 (4, 5, 6) (1, 1, 2)
Seven pairwise comparison matrices were constructed, 6 for
providing sub-criteria importance weights under the 6 main
criteria, and 1 for providing main criteria importance weights.
The next step was to check the compatibility matrix of paired
comparisons provided by the experts, using the Mikhailov method.
With LINGO™ software, the compatibility rate was calculated for
each matrix. In the calculations shown, there is incompatibility only
in l2, l4, and l5 in the matrices, as follows:
l2 ¼ 1:05 l4 ¼ 2:75 l5 ¼ 1:23
The compatibility matrix of Ghazanfari and Nojavan (2004) was
used; see Equation (7) above. For the sake of brevity, a sample
matrix of paired comparisons before and after the compatibility has
been established in Table 4. Using the method of Ghazanfari and
Nojavan's matrix with the parameters in Table 4 obtains the
changes below.
After using the aforementioned reformation, and the method of
Mikhailov's Model 5 (Mikhailov, 2003), l is recalculated and results
are as follows:
l2 ¼ 0:666 l4 ¼ 0:891 l5 ¼ 0:758
At this stage, integration of paired comparison matrices is un-
dertaken to ensure compatibility matrices. This is calculated using
the geometric mean for each element. Then, the normalized
importance weight vector is obtained, as given in Table 5.
Fuzzy individual green schools readiness assessment values
were collected from the 6 experts. These individual scores were
then integrated to compute the fuzzy weighted collective green
schools readiness assessment scores presented in Table 6.
In the next step, the TOPSIS concepts of the positive ideal so-
lution and negative ideal solution were used for benchmarking
purposes. The ideal green schools readiness score (dþ(t)) and the
(1/6, 1/5, 1/4) Table 7 presents the relative closeness of the 5 green schools under
(1/2, 1, 1) evaluation.
(1, 1, 1)
As shown in Table 7, green school 5 has the lowest ideal green
school readiness score (dþ(t) ¼ 2.901) and the highest nadir green
school readiness score (d(t) ¼ 5.724) compared to its counterparts,
green school 3, green school 4, green school 2, and green school 1.
In other words, green school 5 is the closest to the ideal green
school and the farthest green school from the nadir green school. In
summary, green school 5 has the highest green school readiness
index (CC(t) ¼ 0.662). The final green school readiness ranking of
the 5 green schools in Iran is as follows:
Green school 5 > Green school 3 > Green school 4 > Green
school 1 > Green school 2.
Whole-school approaches to sustainability were vital to move
toward sustainable communities (Henderson and Tilbury, 2004).
Iran's integrative assessment system for green schools was identi-
fied with the aim of rationalizing the selection process, facilitating
the detection of potential green schools, and providing scientific
support in school selection, to avoid hasty choices and respect the
selection of these schools.
A decision system is provided for the green schools selection
problem in this study. FAHP and FTOPSIS compound decision-
making method have been used in the proposed system.
In order to consider the uncertainties associated with paired
comparisons, the theory of fuzzy sets has been applied to the
investigation, leading to greater precision in context measurement.
While techniques such as AHP and ANP (analytic network process),
commonly used in such decision making, increase the number of
criteria in the evaluation schools, reliability is lost and generally
yields inconsistent assessments (Hsu and Hu, 2009). Factors critical
to many researchers utilizing FAHP are not considered in the fuzzy
compatibility matrix (Leung and Cao, 2000). In order to check the
compatibility matrix pairings, the Mikhailov (2003) method has
been applied; it has several advantages over other methods of
compliance review.
The methods of Lee et al. (2009) and Kutlu and Ekmekçiog lu
(2012) have been used to determine the rate of adaptation in or-
der to check the consistency of the method of paired comparison

Table 4
The calculated values obtained from Ghazanfari and Nojavan's Equation (7) (Ghazanfari and Nojavan, 2004).

Element lij qij pij Element lij qij pij Element lij qij pij Element lij qij pij Element lij qij pij
X13 2 0 1 X15 2 0 2 X21 2 0 2 X33 2 0 2 X42 2 0 2
X12 2 0 2 X22 2 0 2 X30 2 0 2 X36 2 0 2 X51 1 0 2

Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11 9

Table 6
The fuzzy weighted collective green schools readiness scores of the 15 sub-criteria for the 5 green schools in Iran.

Sub-criteria Green school 1 Green school 2 Green school 3 Green school 4 Green school 5

A1. Building orientation (2.35, 5.70, 0.30) (4.35, 7.20, 0.75) (4.35, 5.60, 0.35) (6.70, 5.75, 0.02) (6.70, 5.20, 0.03)
A2. Noise pollution (2.35, 3.30, 0.00) (2.70, 3.30, 0.30) (4.25, 3.40, 0.75) (2.25, 3.30, 0.06) (4.25, 7.10, 0.55)
A3. Design and architecture (6.85, 5.70, 0.75) (6.85, 3.30, 0.02) (6.70, 7.20, 0.04) (2.25, 3.30, 0.06) (8.40, 8.40, 0.04)
B1. Air quality (4.40, 3.30, 0.75) (4.35, 5.75, 0.75) (6.70, 7.10, 0.02) (4.30, 7.10, 0.75) (6.70, 7.10, 0.02)
B2. Thermal comfort (2.25, 7.30, 0.30) (4.35, 7.20, 0.75) (2.80, 5.60, 0.75) (6.70, 5.75, 0.75) (4.25, 5.20, 0.55)
C1. Green space (2.35, 5.70, 0.65) (2.60, 5.75, 0.02) (6.70, 5.75, 0.35) (2.25, 5.75, 0.02) (6.70, 5.20, 0.04)
D1. Management features (2.70, 5.70, 0.75) (4.35, 5.75, 0.30) (4.35, 3.40, 0.02) (4.30, 5.60, 0.02) (4.25, 8.40, 0.02)
D2. Energy (4.25, 3.30, 0.02) (4.35, 3.30, 0.06) (6.80, 5.20, 0.04) (6.70, 5.75, 0.06) (6.70, 5.20, 0.04)
D3. Waste management (2.35, 5.70, 0.06) (2.70, 5.75, 0.30) (2.80, 7.20, 0.02) (2.25, 7.20, 0.02) (8.40, 7.10, 0.02)
D4. Transportation (2.25, 3.30, 0.75) (2.70, 7.30, 0.75) (4.35, 5.60, 0.74) (2.25, 5.75, 0.75) (4.40, 5.20, 0.04)
E1. Environmental education (6.85, 7.20, 0.75) (6.85, 3.30, 0.02) (4.25, 3.40, 0.06) (4.30, 3.30, 0.06) (4.25, 8.40, 0.55)
E2. Environmental activities (2.35, 3.30, 0.65) (2.60, 3.30, 0.30) (4.35, 7.30, 0.35) (2.25, 7.30, 0.06) (4.25, 7.20, 0.55)
E3. Attitude (2.35, 7.30, 0.02) (2.70, 7.20, 0.30) (6.70, 7.10, 0.02) (4.30, 5.75, 0.02) (6.70, 7.10, 0.02)
F1. Participation in school (4.40, 3.30, 0.30) (2.70, 3.30, 0.02) (6.70, 3.40, 0.35) (2.30, 5.75, 0.75) (6.70, 8.40, 0.04)
F2. Participation outside school (2.25, 5.70, 0.30) (4.35, 5.75, 0.75) (2.80, 5.60, 0.06) (2.25, 3.30, 0.75) (8.40, 5.20, 0.55)

Table 7
The green schools readiness scores of the 5 green schools in Iran.

Green school 1 Green school 2 Green school 3 Green school 4 Green school 5

dþ(t) 2.124 4.044 3.981 2.376 2.901

d(t) 3.761 4.339 4.809 3.383 5.724
CC(t) 0.511 0.478 0.591 0.532 0.662

matrices via FAHP. The fuzzy compatibility problem is a related
research topic, and the detection of inconsistencies and determi-
nation of best data leads to inconsistencies that do not offer
appropriate suggestions for their correction (Zheng et al., 2012;
Dagdeviren et al., 2009). Ghazanfari and Nojavan's procedure was
called upon in the study to judge the incompatibility matrix until
the final weights obtained were found to have good reliability and
validity (Ghazanfari and Nojavan, 2004).
The analysis results show that the main criterion, management
features, is the most important criterion in the evaluation of green
schools and environmental education; waste management and
participation were the next most important criteria. Moreover,
previous studies have shown that engineering-architectural char-
acteristics have influences on student success (Rudd et al., 2008);
however, this study found that experts consider the behavioral
characteristics of beneficiaries, rather than school engineering-
architectural characteristics, more important.
Weights of engineering-architecture characteristics in green
schools show that the criteria of green space and indoor air rank
first and second among the other criteria of engineering-
architecture. Green space in urban areas generates demand for
goods and services, and supports resilience on the system
(Lafortezza et al., 2013; Larondelle and Haase, 2012; Ioja  et al.,
2014). A great deal of research in the field of green schoolyards
and learning outside the classroom has been completed (Beames
et al., 2012). Schools offering outdoor education have hidden as-
sets and revise the approach of designing schools' green spaces, a
subject that needs to be addressed now. Weights obtained for sub-
criteria in green schools show that to improve indoor air, the most
important element is air quality, and thermal comfort is the next
sub-criterion. Research shows that indoor air pollution in metro-
politan areas mainly stems from outdoor air pollution, the source of
which is primarily the high volume of vehicle traffic (Halek et al.,
2004). Processes such as increasing schools' green space depend
not only on increasing indoor air quality; they also help to maintain
proper thermal comfort.
This study, like any other, has several limitations. First, experts
experienced difficulty in finding adequate time to complete the
required information and with the hierarchical decision-making
procedures. This was a serious obstacle in the strict implementa-
tion of the schools' evaluation. Second, the results depended on
quantitative data and qualitative judgments. The integrative
assessment system for green schools, developed for a single
country, could have bias in the weights of the various criteria.
Another limitation of the proposed system is that it ignores
behavioral and political factors that may influence the weight
determination process. Third, Iran is a vast country with many races
and diverse cultures. There are remarkable differences in the level
of economic development and variations in culture and social
environment. These differences are reflected in the number and
quality of green schools. This effort evaluated green schools in
Tehran, a megacity. A valuable research direction would be to
include more areas (urban, rural or township) to reflect the socio-
economic background in the research.
Furthermore, increased interest in the green school concept has
led to a variety of rating systems assessing green schools, and
contributions to their sustainability are emerging. Such systems
have substantial potential to contribute to green school efforts, but
few systems have been completed with data suggesting limited
impacts. One interesting direction for future research would be to
investigate the influence of green school rating systems to help
sustainability. How could schools make use of rating systems to
better serve their sites? Should schools also provide rating systems'
methodology to improve interactivity? How should schools
develop these rating systems and how would they play a part in the
schools' collaborative management processes? Finally, rating sys-
tems would consist of a standardized assessment instrument to be
filled out. Based on their scores, institutions would attain different
levels of achievement. Eventually, these may be independently
scored, with a total score determined by combining category scores
according to an algorithm. This must be further explored in future
research.
6. Conclusion
In order to cope with environmental and energy problems, great
attempts have been made all over the world in terms of projects,
agreements, instructions, standards and regulations. The green

Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
10 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
school project is set forth to promote initiatives toward the sus-
tainable development of the whole society.
Recognizing the need for a rigorous method to identify and
validate green schools, the integrative assessment system for green
schools has been created. It incorporates data gathering and anal-
ysis, enabling government and other organizations to determine
which schools are indeed green schools. The practical and valuable
implication of this methodology delivers into the hands of decision
makers school rankings that they can trust, and on which they can
make decisions in an environment of education experts.
By using the FAHP method, a proposal for an integrative
assessment system for green schools in Iran has been initiated, and
by using the FTOPSIS method in the current situation, the means to
test this system have been determined. The approach is supported
by a checklist of criteria that benefits an integrative assessment
system for green schools, taking into account its scientific back-
ground, conceptual coherence and relevance to the green schools
assessment, as well as indicator organization and methodological
approaches for data collection and analysis. The checklist of criteria
has been gauged across 6 criteria and 15 sub-criteria, using a
consistent testing methodology.
Important system criteria include management, education,
participation, green space, indoor air, and location and position of
the building. Important of sub-criteria include participation in
school, air quality, noise pollution, management features, envi-
ronmental education, waste management, environmental activ-
ities, design and architecture, thermal comfort, participation
outside school, attitude, energy, building orientation and trans-
portation. The integrative assessment system with these proposed
criteria showed that green schools 5, 3, 4, 1 and 2, respectively, have
obtained first to fifth rank in terms of proposed criteria for green
schools.
Integrative assessment system for green schools also encour-
ages the development of measurements that contribute to under-
standing the inherent worth in providing education through green
schools. Students who have grown up in this environment will
bring their learning to their homes and communities, thereby
contributing to the green world. The combination of the secure
integrative assessment system for green schools methodology with
green education will help accelerate the benefits of green schools.
Although the integrative assessment system for green schools
was developed and tested for use in green schools' selection in Iran,
it can also be used with small modifications in various decision
making efforts in other countries. In addition, mathematical models
can be combined with the proposed system, improving the pro-
posed system. This is one of the goals of future research.
Acknowledgments
This project is supported by the Research Management and
Strategic Studies of Mashhad Municipality of Iran (529.93.194818).
References
American National Standards Institute, 2002. Standard S12.60. Acoustical Perfor-
mance Criteria, Design Requirements and Guidelines for Schools. ANSI, Wash-
ington, DC. Available at: http://www.acoustics.com/ansi_education.asp
(accessed 28.06.14.).
Asdrubali, F., Baldinelli, G., Bianchi, F., Sambuco, S., 2015. A comparison between
environmental sustainability rating systems LEED and ITACA for residential
buildings. Build. Environ. 86, 98e108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.
01.001.
Bai, S-w., Zhang, J-s, Wang, Z., 2016. Selection of a sustainable technology for cutting
granite block into slabs. J. Clean. Prod. 112 (4), 2278e2291. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.052.
Beames, S., Higgins, P.J., Nicol, R., 2012. Introduction and Overview; Learning across
the Curriculum, in Learning Outside the Classroom: Theory and Guidelines for
Practice. Routledge, New York.
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
Büyüko €zkan, G., Çifçi, S., Güleryüz, S., 2011. Strategic analysis of healthcare service
quality using fuzzy AHP methodology. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 9407e9424. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.103.
Chan, T.C., Mense, E.G., Lane, K.E., Richardson, M.D., 2015. Marketing the Green
School: Form, Function, and the Future, 1e400. IGI Global, Hershey, PA. http://
dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6312-1.
Chang, D.Y., 1992. Extent Analysis and Synthetic Decision, Optimization Techniques
and Applications. World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 1e352.
Chen, C.-T., 2000. Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy
environment. Fuzzy Set Syst. 114, 1e9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)
00377-1.
^ ^
Cin cera, J., Krajhanzl, J., 2013. Eco-schools: what factors influence pupils' action
competence for pro-environmental behavior? J. Clean. Prod. 61, 117e121. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.030.
Cole, L.B., 2013. The teaching green school building: a framework for linking ar-
chitecture and environmental education. Environ. Educ. Res. 20, 836e857.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.833586.
Collaborative for High Performance Schools, 2004. Best Practices Manual, vol. 1e4.
Sacramento, California. Available online from: http://www.chps.net (accessed
23.03.13.).
Datnow, A., 2005. The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in
changing district and state contexts. Educ. Adm. Q. 41, 121e153. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269578.
Dautremont-Smith, J., 2012. School Sustainability Rating Systems: Strengths, Lim-
itations, and Future Prospects. M.S. dissertation. University of Michigan. Handle.
http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90923.
Day, E., 2009. Fostering Whole-systems Thinking through Architecture: Eco-school
Case Studies in Europe and Japan. Undergraduate honors thesis. Cornell Uni-
versity. Retrieved April 30, 2012, from the website temoa: Open Educational
Resources (OER) Portal, Technolo gico de Monterrey, Available online from:
http://www.temoa.info/node/166764.
Dagdeviren, M., Yavuz, S., Kilinç, N., 2009. Weapon selection using the AHP and
TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 8143e8151.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.016.
Department of the Environment, 2014. Draft Report: Introduction for Compre-
hensive Environmental Schools in Iran; Tehran (In Persian). Available online
from: http://coariya.org/UserFiles/Flash/Environmental%20schools/
Environmental%20schools.pdf (accessed 13.11.14.).
Dougan, D.S., Damiano, L.A., 2003. Productivity and Health. Available online from:
http://www.automatedbuildings.com/news/apr03/articles/ebtron/ebtron.htm
(accessed 25.08.12.).
Elzeyadi, I.M.K., 2012. Quantifying the Impacts of Green Schools on People
and Planet. U.S. Green Building Council, Eugene, OR. Available online from:
http://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/IHAB.greenbuildexpo.org_Files_2012_
Greenbuild2012-research.pdf.
Foundation for Environmental Education, 2015. International Eco-schools Pro-
gramme. Available online from: http://www.eco-schools.org/page.php?id¼52
(accessed 10.13.15.).
Ghazanfari, M., Nojavan, M., 2004. Reducing inconsistency in fuzzy AHP by math-
ematical programming models. Asia-Pac. J. Oper. Res. 21, 379e391. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0217595904000291.
Gordon, D.E., 2010. Green Schools as High Performance Learning Facilities. National
Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, Washington, D.C. Available online
from: http://www.ncef.org/pubs/greenschools.pdf (accessed 23.02.12.).
Halek, F., Kavouci, A., Montahaie, H., 2004. Role of motor-vehicles and trend of air
borne particulate in the Great Tehran area. Iran. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 14
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09603120410001725649, 307e301.
Henderson, K., Tilbury, D.D., 2004. Whole-school Approaches to Sustainability: an
International Review of Sustainable School Programs. Report prepared by the
Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES). The
Department of the Environment and Heritage, Queensland, Australia.
Hens, L., Wiedemann, T., Raath, S., Stone, R., Renders, P., Craenhals, E., Rochter, B.,
2010. Monitoring environmental management at primary schools in
South Africa. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 666e677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2009.11.001.
Heschong Mahone Group, 2003. Windows and Classrooms: a Study of Student
Performance and the Indoor Environment. Technical report P500-2003-082-A-
07, for the California Energy Commission. Heschong Mahone Group, Fair Oaks,
CA, pp. 2e4.
Hsu, C.-W., Hu, A.H., 2009. Applying hazardous substance management to supplier
selection using analytic network process. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 255e264. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.05.004.
Hunter, G.J., Goodchild, M.F., 1993. Managing uncertainty in spatial databases:
putting theory into practice. J. Urban Reg. Inf. Syst. Assoc. 5, 55e62.
Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Ap-
plications. Springer, Berlin.
, C.I., Gr
Ioja adinaru, S.R., Onose, D.A., Va ^n 
au, G.O., Tudor, A.C., 2014. The potential of
school green areas to improve urban green connectivity and multifunctionality.
Urban For. Urban Green. 13 (4), 704e713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ufug.2014.07.002.
Jabareen, Y., 2013. Planning the resilient city: concepts and strategies for coping
with climate change and environmental risk. Cities 31, 220e229. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.05.004.
Kluczek, A., Gladysz, B., 2015. Analytical hierarchy process/technique for order
preference by similarity to ideal solution-based approach to the generation of
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e11
environmental improvement options for painting process e results from an
industrial case study. J. Clean. Prod. 101, 360e367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2015.03.079.
Kutlu, A.C., Ekmekçiog lu, M., 2012. Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using
fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst. Appl. 39, 61e67. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.044.
Lafortezza, R., Davies, C., Sanesi, G., Konijnendijk, C.C., 2013. Green Infrastructure as
a tool to support spatial planning in European urban regions. iForest 6 (3),
102e108. http://dx.doi.org/10.3832/ifor0723-006.
Larondelle, N., Haase, D., 2012. Valuing post-mining landscapes using an ecosystem
services approachdan example from Germany. Ecol. Indic. 18, 567e574. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.01.008.
Lee, A.H.I., Kang, H.Y., Hsu, C.F., Hung, H.C., 2009. A green supplier selection model
for high-tech industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 7917e7927. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.eswa.2008.11.052.
Leung, L.C., Cao, D., 2000. On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP.
Eur. J. Oper. Res.124,102e113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00118-6.
Lozano, R., Lukman, R., Lozano, F., Huisingh, D., Lambrechts, W., 2013. Declarations
for sustainability in higher education: becoming better leaders, through
addressing the university system. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 10e19. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.006.
Lysgaard, J.G., Larsen, N., Læssøe, J., 2015. Green flag eco-schools and the challenge
of moving forward. In: Responsible Living. Springer International Publishing,
Cham, Switzerland, pp. 135e150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15305-
6_10.
Matsumoto, T., Daudey, L., 2014. Urban Green Growth in Dynamic Asia: a Concep-
€
tual Framework. Orebro University, OECD Publishing: OECD Regional Devel-
opment Working Papers, Sweden. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5js7svlw8m0x-en.
Meiboudi, H., 2013. Environmental Education in Contemporary Iran, first ed. Lap
Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany, pp. 20e29.
Mikhailov, L., 2003. Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judge-
ments. Fuzzy Set Syst. 134, 365e385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(02)
00383-4.
Mogensen, F.R., Mayer, M. (Eds.), 2005. Eco-schools: Trends and Divergences : a
Comparative Study on ECO-school Development Processes in 13 Countries.
Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Vienna.
Nicklas, M.H., Bailey, G.B., 2012. Analysis of the Performance of Students in Daylit
Schools. Innovative Design, Raleigh. Available online from: http://www.
innovativedesign.net/files/Download/Analysis of Student Performance in
DaylitSchools.pdf (accessed 20.04.12.).
Orr, D.W., 1994. Earth in Mind: on Education, Environment, and the Human Pros-
pect. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 30e46
Pasupathy, A., Velraj, R., Seeniraj, R.V., 2008. Phase change material-based building
architecture for thermal management in residential and commercial estab-
lishments. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 12, 39e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2006.05.010.
Pires, A., Martinho, G., Ribeiro, R., Mota, M., Teixeira, L., 2015. Extended producer re-
sponsibility: a differential fee model for promoting sustainable packaging. J. Clean.
Prod. 108, 343e353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.084. Part A.
Power, C.N., 2015. Science, Technology, Health and Sustainable Development. ch. 12.
In: The Power of Education: Education for All, Development, Globalisation and
UNESCO. Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, Singapore, pp. 205e223. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-221-0.
Rickinson, M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.Y., Sanders, D., Benefield, P.,
2004. A Review of Research on Outdoor Learning: Executive Summary. Field
Studies Council, Shrewsbury.
Rostamzadeh, R., Sofian, S., 2011. Prioritizing effective 7Ms to improve production
systems performance using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS (case study). Expert
Syst. Appl. 38, 5166e5177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.045.
Rudd, P., Reed, F., Smith, P., 2008. The Effects of the School Environment on Young
People's Attitudes to Education and Learning. National Foundation for Educa-
tional Research (NFER), Slough, UK.
Saaty, T.L., 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math.
Psychol. 15, 234e281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.
Please cite this article in press as: Meiboudi, H., et al., Creating an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004
11
Saaty, T.L., 2000. Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the
Analytical Hierarchy Process, second ed. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
Sammalisto, K., Brorson, T., 2008. Training and communication in the imple-
mentation of environmental management systems (ISO 14001): a case study at
the University of Gavle, Sweden. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 299e309. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.07.029.
Shobeiri, S.M., Meiboudi, H., Ahmadi Kamali, F., 2014. The brief history of envi-
ronmental education and its changes from 1972 to present in Iran. Int. Res.
Geogr. Environ. Educ. 23, 228e241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
10382046.2014.927169.
Singer, M.J., 2003. Acoustics in Schools. Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ.
Available online from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED477368.pdf (accessed
10.05.12.).
Smedje, G., Norback, D., 1999. The school environment e is it related to the inci-
dence of asthma in the pupils?. In: Indoor Air'99 The Eighth International
Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, vol. 5, pp. 445e450.
Tavana, M., Zandi, F., Katehakis, M.N., 2013. A hybrid fuzzy group ANP-TOPSIS
framework for assessment of e-government readiness from a CiRM
perspective. Inf. Manag. 50, 383e397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.im.2013.05.008.
€nük, S., Kayihan, K.S., 2013. A study on sustainable use of school sites at (primary)
To
eco-schools in Istanbul. Environ. Plan. Manag. 56, 919e933. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/09640568.2012.709179.
United Nations, 1993. Earth Summit: Agenda 21; the United Nations Programme of
Action from Rio. Department of Public Information, United Nations. New York,
NY, US. Available online from: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/50234 (accessed
10.18. 15.).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008. Care for Your Air: a Guide to Indoor Air
Quality. Washington, DC: EPA/402/F-08/008. Available online from: http://
nepis.epa.gov/ (accessed 11.01.15.).
U.S. Green Building Council, 2007. A National Green Building Research Agenda.
USGBC Research Committee. U.S. Green Buildings Council, Washington, DC.
U.S. Green Building Council, 2009. LEED 2009 for Schools New Construction and
Major Renovations Rating System. Washington, DC. Available online from:
http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/General/Docs5547.pdf (accessed
25.11.14.).
van Laarhoven, P.J.M., Pedrycz, W., 1983. A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory.
Fuzzy Set Syst. 11, 199e227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(83)80082-7.
Wang, X., Chan, H.K., Yee, W.Y., Diaz-Rainey, I., 2012. A two-stage fuzzy-AHP model
for risk assessment of implementing green initiatives in the fashion supply
chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 135, 595e606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijpe.2011.03.021.
Wargocki, P., Wyon, D.P., Matysiak, B., Irgens, S., 2005. The effects of classroom air
temperature and outdoor air supply rate on the performance of school work by
children. In: Proceedings of Indoor Air 2005. Tsinghua University Press, Beijing,
China, pp. 122e161.
Yoon, K., Hwang, C.L., 1995. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: an Introduction.
Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.
Zadeh, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Comput. 8, 338e353.
Zeng, H., Yang, G., Lee, J.C.K., 2009. Green schools in China. In: Schooling for Sus-
tainable Development in Chinese Communities: Experience with Younger
Children. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 137e156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-
4020-9686-0_7.
Zhao, D.-X., He, B.-J., Meng, F.-Q., 2015. The green school project: a means of
speeding up sustainable development? Geoforum 65, 310e313. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.08.012.
Zheng, G., Zhu, N., Tian, Z., Chen, Y., Sun, B., 2012. Application of a trapezoidal fuzzy
AHP method for work safety evaluation and early warning rating of hot and
humid environments. Sci. Saf. 50, 228e239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ssci.2011.08.042.
Zhu, Q., 2015. Language attitudes of secondary school students in Guangdong. In:
Feng, A., Adamson, B. (Eds.), Trilingualism in Education in China: Models and
Challenges, vol. 12. Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, Dordrecht, pp. 223e241.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9352-0_10.