IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021ispecial5p91-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group-Oriented, Hierarchical and Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Urban Transportation Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Miroslaw Kruszynski
  • Jacek Zak

Abstract

Purpose: Different approaches have been proposed to assess various transportation projects, processes, and systems. Two major streams of transportation projects assessment include Multiple Criteria Analysis (MCA) and Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). In many cases the decision process concerning the selection of a concrete transportation project for implementation has a participatory character and involves group – oriented analysis. In this paper, based on the combined methodologies of MCA and GDM (Group Decision Making), we propose a generic paradigm of the assessment of urban transportation projects considered for implementation in a certain metropolitan area. Design/Methodology/Approach: Our approach allows to evaluate transportation projects using different criteria formulated at different levels of the hierarchical analysis - operational, tactical, and strategic. The important component of our approach is the team-based decision-making process that helps to categorize and rank the projects. This process involves interaction between many entities (bodies) and requires searching for combined preferences generated through compromise-oriented exchange of viewpoints. Findings: The proposed methodology is designed to assist the group decision maker (Gr-DM) in planning and developing the transportation infrastructure, enhancing the transportation services, and improving the operations of a transportation system. The proposed approach is tested in Poznan, Poland as a real-world case study. Practical implications: Methodology can be applied by municipal authorities (councils, commissions) while defining annual financial budget and the portfolio of the municipal investments. Originality/Value: New paradigm is presented and discussed

Suggested Citation

  • Miroslaw Kruszynski & Jacek Zak, 2021. "Group-Oriented, Hierarchical and Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Urban Transportation Projects," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 5), pages 91-121.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special5:p:91-121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/2706/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. De Brucker, Klaas & Macharis, Cathy & Verbeke, Alain, 2011. "Multi-criteria analysis in transport project evaluation: an institutional approach," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 3-24.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ofentse Mokwena, 2016. "Paratransit Mesoeconomy: Control Measures From The Supply Side?," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 3205591, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    2. Laurent Guihéry & Florent Laroche, 2015. "Port Hinterland: the new role of railway transport. The betuwe line (Netherlands) [Hinterland portuaire : le nouveau rôle du fer. Une illustration avec la Betuwe line (Pays-Bas)]," Post-Print halshs-01474042, HAL.
    3. Jacek Zak & Miroslaw Kruszynski, 2021. "Comprehensive, Multiple Level Assessment and Multiple Criteria Ranking of Transportation Projects," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 5), pages 506-532.
    4. Sun, Hui & Zhang, Yiting & Wang, Yuning & Li, Lei & Sheng, Yun, 2015. "A social stakeholder support assessment of low-carbon transport policy based on multi-actor multi-criteria analysis: The case of Tianjin," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 103-116.
    5. Mandic, Dragomir & Jovanovic, Predrag & Bugarinovic, Mirjana, 2014. "Two-phase model for multi-criteria project ranking: Serbian Railways case study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 88-104.
    6. Laurent GUIHERY & Florent LAROCHE, 2015. "Hinterland Portuaire : Le Nouveau Rôle Du Fer. Une Illustration Avec La Betuweroute (Pays-Bas)," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 41, pages 163-173.
    7. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    8. Janić Milan, 2020. "Multicriteria Evaluation of Intermodal (Rail/Road) Freight Transport Corridors," Logistics, Supply Chain, Sustainability and Global Challenges, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multiple Criteria Decision Making/Aiding; AHP and Electre III/IV Methods; Group Decision-Making (GDM); Methodology Multiple Level; Multiple Criteria and Group-Oriented Evaluation of Transportation Projects.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M2 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics
    • M51 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special5:p:91-121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.