Evaluation of Cultural and Creative Products of Jinshan Farmer Painting Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process †
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Jinshan Farmers’ Painting
2.2. AHP
2.3. Fuzzy Theory
2.4. FAHP
2.5. Evaluation Indicators
3. Research Design and Methods
3.1. Hierarchical Framework
3.2. Questionnaire Design
3.3. Data Analysis
3.4. Establishing the FAHP Weight System
- Hierarchical structureBased on a thorough review of the relevant literature, a hierarchical structure was constructed, as shown in Figure 1. The first level represents the evaluation of Jinshan Farmer Painting cultural and creative products, while the primary indicators represent the major factors influencing the final goal. The second tier consists of detailed evaluation indicators.
- Questionnaire surveyUsing the AHP method as a framework, the questionnaire was designed to compare factors pairwise based on the hierarchy established in Step 1. A pairwise comparison matrix was constructed for the different factors.
- Fuzzy reciprocal matrixExpert opinions were converted to triangular fuzzy numbers. A fuzzy comparison between two indicators was conducted using Equation (1).Based on the expert ratings, a fuzzy reciprocal matrix was constructed.
- Group aggregationTo integrate the opinions of multiple experts, Buckley’s [10] geometric mean method was applied. The group fuzzy number was calculated as
- Fuzzy weightsThe fuzzy weight vector was calculated using Equation (3).The aggregated fuzzy weight vector was defined as
- DefuzzificationDefuzzification was performed using the centroid method proposed by Teng and Tzeng [11]. The defuzzified weight value is calculated as
- NormalizationAfter defuzzification, the weights were normalized to ensure that the total weight summed to 1. Normalization was conducted using Equation (6).
- HierarchyTo derive the final evaluation weights, a hierarchical linkage was applied. The final weight of a second-tier evaluation indicator was obtained by multiplying the weight of the first-tier indicator by that of the second-tier indicator:
4. Results and Discussion
- Cultural value (0.309): This had the highest weight, reflecting the experts’ emphasis on cultural heritage and artistic value, which were core considerations in cultural product development.
- Market potential (0.258): This indicated the importance of market demand and competitiveness in the success of cultural products.
- Innovation (0.227): The importance of innovation in design, functionality, and brand building was critical for attracting consumers and building brand recognition.
- Sustainability (0.206): While relatively lower in weight, environmental friendliness and social responsibility were increasingly important in today’s market.
- Market demand (0.100): This showed the highest weight overall, highlighting the importance of assessing market demand in product development and promotion.
- Design innovation (0.087) and traditional culture heritage (0.088): These factors reflected the importance of a unique design and the preservation of traditional culture for competitive and culturally meaningful products.
- Market competitiveness (0.086) and environmental friendliness (0.062): Both factors were vital for long-term success, ensuring that products not only succeed in the market but also meet sustainability standards.
4.1. Consistency
4.2. Practical Verification
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chen, B. Research on the Artistic Characteristics and Cultural Creative Development of Jinshan Farmers’ Painting. Shanghai Art Res. 2017, 2, 34–38. [Google Scholar]
- Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy Sets. Inf. Control. 1965, 8, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y. Innovative Applications of Traditional Arts in Modern Design. Des. J. 2021, 24, 145–157. [Google Scholar]
- Mendoza, M.A.D.; De La Hoz Franco, E.; Gómez, J.E.G. Technologies for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage—A Systematic Review of the Literature. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Chen, H.; Hamat, B.; Zhao, Y. Research on cultural and creative design method of 2022 World Cup lamps based on AHP-FCE. PLoS ONE 2023, 11, e0316861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shen, Z.; Li, X.; Wu, T. Evaluating the Market Potential of Cultural Creative Products Using AHP. Creat. Ind. J. 2020, 13, 77–88. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, C. Sustainability in Cultural Creative Industries: Case Studies on Life Cycle Assessment. J. Cult. Stud. 2017, 45, 89–103. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, W. Cultural Creative Product Evaluation Using AHP. J. Art Des. 2019, 10, 112–119. [Google Scholar]
- Buckley, J.J. Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1985, 17, 233–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teng, J.J.; Tzeng, G.H. Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision Making for Treatment of Landfill Sites. J. Environ. Eng. 1993, 119, 454–472. [Google Scholar]
Reference | Indicators |
---|---|
Mendoza [5]. | Traditional Cultural Transmission, Cultural Education Function, Historical Background Presentation |
Wang [6]. | Cultural Symbolism, Brand Image Building |
Saaty [2]. | Social Impact, Consumer Satisfaction, Social Responsibility |
Shen [7]. | Market Demand, Price Reasonability, Technological Application |
Li [4]. | Design Innovation, Functional Innovation |
Yang [8]. | Environmental Friendliness, Long-Term Development Potential, Resource Efficiency, Lifecycle Management |
Zhang [9]. | Market Competitiveness, Sales Channels, Market Positioning Innovation |
Primary Indicator | Secondary Indicator | References |
---|---|---|
Cultural value | Traditional cultural transmission | Mendoza [5], Chen [1]. |
Cultural symbolism | Wang [6]. | |
Social impact | Saaty [2], Chen [1]. | |
Historical background representation | Chen [1]. | |
Market potential | Market demand | Shen [7], Mendoza [5]. |
Market competitiveness | Zhang [9], Li [4]. | |
Consumer satisfaction | Saaty [2], Zhang [9]. | |
Innovation | Design innovation | Li [4], Mendoza [5]. |
Functional and technological innovation | Li [4]. | |
Brand image building | Wang [6], Mendoza [5]. | |
Sustainability | Environmental friendliness | Yang [8]. |
Social responsibility | Yang [8]. | |
Long-term development potential | Yang [8], Zhang [9]. | |
Lifecycle management | Yang [8], Shen [7]. |
Scale | Secondary Indicators |
---|---|
Equally important | (1, 1, 1) |
Between equally and slightly important | (1, 2, 3) |
Slightly important | (2, 3, 4) |
Between slightly and important | (3, 4, 5) |
Important | (4, 5, 6) |
Between important and very important | (5, 6, 7) |
Very important | (6, 7, 8) |
Between very and extremely important | (7, 8, 9) |
Extremely important | (8, 9, 10) |
Second-Level Indicator | Fuzzy Weight | Defuzzified Fuzzy Weight | Normalized Fuzzy Weight |
---|---|---|---|
Traditional culture heritage | (0.25, 0.30, 0.35) | 0.30 | 0.286 |
Cultural symbolism | (0.20, 0.25, 0.30) | 0.27 | 0.257 |
Social impact | (0.18, 0.22, 0.27) | 0.25 | 0.238 |
Historical representation | (0.15, 0.20, 0.25) | 0.23 | 0.219 |
Market demand | (0.30, 0.35, 0.40) | 0.35 | 0.389 |
Market competitiveness | (0.25, 0.30, 0.35) | 0.30 | 0.333 |
Consumer satisfaction | (0.20, 0.25, 0.30) | 0.25 | 0.278 |
Design innovation | (0.32, 0.37, 0.42) | 0.37 | 0.385 |
Technical innovation | (0.25, 0.30, 0.35) | 0.32 | 0.333 |
Brand image building | (0.20, 0.25, 0.30) | 0.27 | 0.281 |
Environmental friendliness | (0.28, 0.33, 0.38) | 0.33 | 0.300 |
Social responsibility | (0.24, 0.29, 0.34) | 0.29 | 0.264 |
Long-term development | (0.20, 0.25, 0.30) | 0.25 | 0.227 |
Lifecycle management | (0.18, 0.23, 0.28) | 0.23 | 0.209 |
First-Level Indicator | Weight | Second-Level Indicator | Weight | Overall Weight |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cultural value | 0.309 | Traditional culture heritage | 0.286 | 0.088 |
Cultural symbolism | 0.257 | 0.079 | ||
Social impact | 0.238 | 0.074 | ||
Historical representation | 0.219 | 0.068 | ||
Market potential | 0.258 | Market demand | 0.389 | 0.100 |
Market competitiveness | 0.333 | 0.086 | ||
Consumer satisfaction | 0.278 | 0.072 | ||
Innovation | 0.227 | Design innovation | 0.385 | 0.087 |
Technical innovation | 0.333 | 0.076 | ||
Brand image building | 0.281 | 0.064 | ||
Sustainability | 0.206 | Environmental friendliness | 0.300 | 0.062 |
Social responsibility | 0.264 | 0.054 | ||
Long-term development | 0.227 | 0.047 | ||
Lifecycle management | 0.209 | 0.043 |
Indicator Level | CI | CR | Validation |
---|---|---|---|
First-level indicators | 0.03 | 0.025 | Yes |
Cultural value | 0.04 | 0.035 | Yes |
Market potential | 0.02 | 0.017 | Yes |
Innovation | 0.03 | 0.028 | Yes |
Sustainability | 0.02 | 0.018 | Yes |
Entry | Design Concept |
---|---|
A: Jinshan Farmer Painting music box Designers: Hou Yuhao, Li Liping, Yang Yueyi | The design blends traditional Jinshan Farmer Painting artistic features with a modern music box design. Through vibrant colors and miniature rural scenes, the work vividly displays the cultural landscape of Jinshan. The concept combines cultural heritage with innovation, preserving the traditional art’s visual representation while adding practicality and market appeal through the music box medium, making it a model of traditional culture’s innovative dissemination. |
B: The bowl and spoon set Designer: Gao Yanqin | This design incorporates elements of Jinshan Farmer Painting into modern tableware. Using bright colors and contrasting patterns, the tableware is both ornamental and practical. The design not only maintains the aesthetic beauty of folk art but also promotes local culture through everyday utensils, achieving a successful integration of traditional art into modern life. |
C: The coaster with First National Congress Site theme Designer: Zhu Xi | Incorporating red as the main color, symbolizing revolutionary spirit, the design integrates Jinshan Farmer Painting elements. The interactive sand-flow effect adds playfulness to the product, bringing traditional culture into daily life in a dynamic way. The design strikes a balance between practicality and cultural significance, creating a product that is both commemorative and artistic. |
Primary Indicator | Secondary Indicator | Raw Score | Weighted Score | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | A | B | C | ||
Cultural value | Traditional culture heritage | 5.000 | 3.917 | 3.083 | 0.440 | 0.345 | 0.271 |
Cultural symbolism | 4.000 | 3.083 | 5.000 | 0.316 | 0.244 | 0.395 | |
Social impact | 4.917 | 3.917 | 4.000 | 0.364 | 0.290 | 0.296 | |
Historical representation | 4.833 | 3.000 | 4.167 | 0.329 | 0.204 | 0.283 | |
Market potential | Market demand | 3.583 | 5.000 | 3.417 | 0.358 | 0.500 | 0.342 |
Market competitiveness | 3.750 | 5.000 | 3.250 | 0.323 | 0.430 | 0.280 | |
Consumer satisfaction | 4.000 | 5.000 | 3.000 | 0.288 | 0.360 | 0.216 | |
Innovation | Design innovation | 4.083 | 4.917 | 3.000 | 0.355 | 0.428 | 0.261 |
Technical innovation | 3.750 | 4.000 | 3.083 | 0.285 | 0.304 | 0.234 | |
Brand image building | 4.000 | 4.000 | 3.917 | 0.256 | 0.256 | 0.251 | |
Sustainability | Environmental friendliness | 3.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 | 0.186 | 0.248 | 0.248 |
Social responsibility | 3.833 | 4.000 | 3.917 | 0.207 | 0.216 | 0.212 | |
Long-term development | 3.083 | 4.000 | 3.917 | 0.145 | 0.188 | 0.184 | |
Lifecycle management | 3.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 | 0.129 | 0.172 | 0.172 | |
Total score | 54.833 | 54.833 | 57.833 | 51.750 | 3.981 | 4.184 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, C.; Dai, H.-M.; Shen, Y.; Liu, Y.-X. Evaluation of Cultural and Creative Products of Jinshan Farmer Painting Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. Eng. Proc. 2025, 98, 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025098046
Liu C, Dai H-M, Shen Y, Liu Y-X. Evaluation of Cultural and Creative Products of Jinshan Farmer Painting Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. Engineering Proceedings. 2025; 98(1):46. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025098046
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Chen, Hong-Mei Dai, Yuan Shen, and Yu-Xuan Liu. 2025. "Evaluation of Cultural and Creative Products of Jinshan Farmer Painting Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process" Engineering Proceedings 98, no. 1: 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025098046
APA StyleLiu, C., Dai, H.-M., Shen, Y., & Liu, Y.-X. (2025). Evaluation of Cultural and Creative Products of Jinshan Farmer Painting Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. Engineering Proceedings, 98(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025098046