IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i16p3559-d1219400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for the Assessment of Public Private Partnerships in Transportation Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Eslam Mohammed Abdelkader

    (Department of Building and Real Estate (BRE), Faculty of Construction and Environment (FCE), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, ZN716 Block Z Phase 8 Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077, China
    Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt)

  • Tarek Zayed

    (Department of Building and Real Estate (BRE), Faculty of Construction and Environment (FCE), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, ZN716 Block Z Phase 8 Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077, China)

  • Hassan El Fathali

    (Department of Building, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Concordia University, Montréal, QC H3G 1M8, Canada)

  • Ghasan Alfalah

    (Department of Architecture and Building Science, College of Architecture and Planning, King Saud University, Riyadh 145111, Saudi Arabia)

  • Abobakr Al-Sakkaf

    (Department of Building, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Concordia University, Montréal, QC H3G 1M8, Canada
    Department of Architecture and Environmental Planning, College of Engineering and Petroleum, Hadhramout University, Mukalla 50512, Yemen)

  • Osama Moselhi

    (Department of Building, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Concordia University, Montréal, QC H3G 1M8, Canada)

Abstract

Public–private partnership (PPP) infrastructure projects have attracted attention over the past few years. In this regard, the selection of private partners is an integral decision to ensure its success. The selection process needs to identify, scrutinize, and pre-qualify potential private partners that sustain the greatest potential in delivering the designated public–private partnership projects. To this end, this research paper proposes an integrated multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model for the purpose of selection of the best private partners in PPP projects. The developed model (HYBD_MCDM) is conceptualized based on two tiers of multi-criteria decision making. In the first tier, the fuzzy analytical network process (FANP) is exploited to scrutinize the relative importance of the priorities of the selection criteria of private partners. In this respect, the PPP selection criteria are categorized as safety, environmental, technical, financial, political policy, and managerial. In the second tier, a set of seven multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) algorithms is leveraged to determine the best private partners to deliver PPP projects. These algorithms comprise the combined compromise solution (CoCoSo), simple weighted sum product (WISP), measurement alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS), combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS), weighted aggregate sum product assessment (WASPAS), technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), and FANP. Thereafter, the Copeland algorithm is deployed to amalgamate the obtained rankings from the seven MCDM algorithms. Four real-world case studies are analyzed to test the implementation and applicability of the developed integrated model. The results indicate that varying levels of importance were exhibited among the managerial, political, and safety and environmental criteria based on the nature of the infrastructure projects. Additionally, the financial and technical criteria were appended as the most important criteria across the different infrastructure projects. It can be argued that the developed model can guide executives of governments to appraise their partner’s ability to achieve their strategic objectives. It also sheds light on prospective private partners’ strengths, weaknesses, and capacities in an attempt to neutralize threats and exploit opportunities offered by today’s construction business market.

Suggested Citation

  • Eslam Mohammed Abdelkader & Tarek Zayed & Hassan El Fathali & Ghasan Alfalah & Abobakr Al-Sakkaf & Osama Moselhi, 2023. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for the Assessment of Public Private Partnerships in Transportation Projects," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-41, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:16:p:3559-:d:1219400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/16/3559/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/16/3559/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarita Gajbhiye Meshram & Ehsan Alvandi & Chandrashekhar Meshram & Ercan Kahya & Ayad M. Fadhil Al-Quraishi, 2020. "Application of SAW and TOPSIS in Prioritizing Watersheds," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 715-732, January.
    2. Shabir Hussain Khahro & Tauha Hussain Ali & Shafiqul Hassan & Noor Yasmin Zainun & Yasir Javed & Shahbaz Aziz Memon, 2021. "Risk Severity Matrix for Sustainable Public-Private Partnership Projects in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Kahraman, Cengiz & Ertay, Tijen & Buyukozkan, Gulcin, 2006. "A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(2), pages 390-411, June.
    4. Michael Garvin & Charles Cheah, 2004. "Valuation techniques for infrastructure investment decisions," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 373-383.
    5. Devendra K. Yadav & Akhilesh Barve, 2019. "Prioritization of cyclone preparedness activities in humanitarian supply chains using fuzzy analytical network process," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(2), pages 683-726, June.
    6. Siyavash Mohseni & Komeyl Baghizadeh & Julia Pahl & Stefania Tomasiello, 2022. "Evaluating Barriers and Drivers to Sustainable Food Supply Chains," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-24, February.
    7. Mumtaz Karatas & Ilknur Karacan & Hakan Tozan, 2018. "An integrated multi-criteria decision making methodology for health technology assessment," European Journal of Industrial Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(4), pages 504-534.
    8. Nannan Wang & Minxun Ma, 2021. "Public–private partnership as a tool for sustainable development – What literatures say?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 243-258, January.
    9. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    10. Abbas Roozbahani & Ebrahim Ebrahimi & Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib, 2018. "A Framework for Ground Water Management Based on Bayesian Network and MCDM Techniques," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(15), pages 4985-5005, December.
    11. Marcus Ahadzi & Graeme Bowles, 2004. "Public-private partnerships and contract negotiations: an empirical study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(9), pages 967-978.
    12. Ting-Kwei Wang & Qian Zhang & Heap-Yih Chong & Xiangyu Wang, 2017. "Integrated Supplier Selection Framework in a Resilient Construction Supply Chain: An Approach via Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Grey Relational Analysis (GRA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    14. Seyed Amirali Hoseini & Alireza Fallahpour & Kuan Yew Wong & Amir Mahdiyar & Morteza Saberi & Serdar Durdyev, 2021. "Sustainable Supplier Selection in Construction Industry through Hybrid Fuzzy-Based Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    15. Pranav Gupta & Alka Bharat, 2022. "Developing sustainable development Index as a tool for appropriate urban land take," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(11), pages 13378-13406, November.
    16. Toriqul Bashar & Ivan W. H. Fung & Lara Celine Jaillon & Di Wang, 2021. "Major Obstacles to Public-Private Partnership (PPP)-Financed Infrastructure Development in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Zhe Cheng & Huanming Wang & Wei Xiong & Dajian Zhu & Le Cheng, 2021. "Public–private partnership as a driver of sustainable development: toward a conceptual framework of sustainability-oriented PPP," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1043-1063, January.
    18. Darius Danesh & Michael J. Ryan & Alireza Abbasi, 2018. "Multi-criteria decision-making methods for project portfolio management: a literature review," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 17(1), pages 75-94.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan F. Pérez-Pérez & Pablo Isaza Gómez & Isis Bonet & María Solange Sánchez-Pinzón & Fabio Caraffini & Christian Lochmuller, 2024. "Assessing Climate Transition Risks in the Colombian Processed Food Sector: A Fuzzy Logic and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Thaís Lima Corrêa & Danielle Costa Morais, 2024. "Private Partner Prioritization for Public–Private Partnership Contracts in a Brazilian Water Company Using a Multi-Criteria Decision Aid Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-22, June.

    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. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    2. Pınar Kaya Samut, 2017. "Integrated FANP-f-MIGP model for supplier selection in the renewable energy sector," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 427-450, May.
    3. Aleksandar Aleksić & Danijela Tadić, 2023. "Industrial and Management Applications of Type-2 Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Techniques Extended with Type-2 Fuzzy Sets from 2013 to 2022," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    4. Yajing Zhang & Weijian Jin & Jingfeng Yuan, 2023. "Policy Perspective on Governmental Implicit Debt Risks of Urban Rail Transit PPP Projects in China: A Grounded Theory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Chunsheng Wu & Gaohuan Liu & Chong Huang & Qingsheng Liu & Xudong Guan, 2018. "Ecological Vulnerability Assessment Based on Fuzzy Analytical Method and Analytic Hierarchy Process in Yellow River Delta," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Harsha Cheemakurthy & Karl Garme, 2022. "Fuzzy AHP-Based Design Performance Index for Evaluation of Ferries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-27, March.
    7. Ozalp Vayvay & Yigit Ozcan & Maria Manuela Cruz-Cunha, 2012. "ERP consultant selection problem using AHP, fuzzy AHP and ANP: A case study in Turkey," E3 Journal of Business Management and Economics., E3 Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 106-117.
    8. Pacheco, Ricardo Rodrigues & Fernandes, Elton & Domingos, Eduardo Marques, 2014. "Airport airside safety index," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 86-92.
    9. Cumhur Güngöroğlu & İrem İsmailoğlu & Bekir Kapukaya & Orkan Özcan & Mustafa Yanalak & Nebiye Musaoğlu, 2024. "Comparison between Post-Fire Analysis and Pre-Fire Risk Assessment According to Various Geospatial Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-15, February.
    10. Nilashi, Mehrbakhsh & Ahmadi, Hossein & Ahani, Ali & Ravangard, Ramin & Ibrahim, Othman bin, 2016. "Determining the importance of Hospital Information System adoption factors using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process (ANP)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 244-264.
    11. Toni Lupo & Seyyed Ali Delbari, 2018. "A knowledge-based exploratory framework to study quality of Italian mobile telecommunication services," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 129-144, May.
    12. Jianghong Feng, 2022. "An integrated multi-criteria decision-making method for hazardous waste disposal site selection," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8039-8070, June.
    13. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Woranat Sangmanee & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2023. "Fuzzy Techniques and Adjusted Mixture Design-Based Scenario Analysis in the CLMV (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam) Subregion for Multi-Criteria Decision Making in the Apparel Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-32, November.
    14. Chatterjee, Kajal & Bandyopadhyay, Abhirup & Ghosh, Amitava & Kar, Samarjit, 2015. "Assessment of environmental factors causing wetland degradation, using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process: A case study on Keoladeo National Park, India," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 316(C), pages 1-13.
    15. Yang Liu & Xiaoxue Ma & Weiliang Qiao & Huiwen Luo & Peilong He, 2021. "Human Factor Risk Modeling for Shipyard Operation by Mapping Fuzzy Fault Tree into Bayesian Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-31, December.
    16. Chen-Hui Chou & Gin-Shuh Liang & Hung-Chung Chang, 2013. "A fuzzy AHP approach based on the concept of possibility extent," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Benyou Jia & Slobodan P. Simonovic & Pingan Zhong & Zhongbo Yu, 2016. "A Multi-Objective Best Compromise Decision Model for Real-Time Flood Mitigation Operations of Multi-Reservoir System," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(10), pages 3363-3387, August.
    18. Fatemeh Bayat & Abbas Roozbahani & Seied Mehdy Hashemy Shahdany, 2022. "Performance Evaluation of Agricultural Surface Water Distribution Systems Based on Water-food-energy Nexus and Using AHP-Entropy-WASPAS Technique," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(12), pages 4697-4720, September.
    19. Li, Yan-Lai & Tang, Jia-Fu & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Jiang, Yu-Shi & Han, Yi & Pu, Yun, 2011. "Estimating the final priority ratings of engineering characteristics in mature-period product improvement by MDBA and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 575-586, June.
    20. Sylvester Ngome Chisika & Chunho Yeom, 2021. "Enhancing Sustainable Management of Public Natural Forests Through Public Private Partnerships in Kenya," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:16:p:3559-:d:1219400. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.