IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2018i1p9-d191961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model

Author

Listed:
  • Omid Ghorbanzadeh

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

  • Sarbast Moslem

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3., 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Thomas Blaschke

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

  • Szabolcs Duleba

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3., 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Sustainable urban transport requires smart and environmentally-friendly technical solutions. It also needs to meet the demands of different user groups, including current and potential future users, in order to avoid opposition of the citizens and to support sustainable development decisions. While these requirements are well-known, conducting full surveys of user needs and preferences are tedious and costly, and the interests of different user groups may be contradictory. We therefore developed a methodology based on the prevalent Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which is capable of dealing with the inconsistencies and uncertainties of users’ responses by applying an Interval Analytic Hierarchy Process (IAHP) through comparing the results of passengers to reference stakeholder groups. For a case study in Mersin, a coastal city in southern Turkey with 1.7 Million inhabitants, three groups were surveyed with questionnaires: 40 users of the public transport system, 40 non-users, and 17 experts. Based on interval pairwise comparison matrices, consisting of whole judgments of all groups, the IAHP methodology could attain a consensual preference ranking for a future public transportation system between the three groups. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the factor ranking was very stable.

Suggested Citation

  • Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Sarbast Moslem & Thomas Blaschke & Szabolcs Duleba, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:9-:d:191961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/9/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/9/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Redman, Lauren & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy & Hartig, Terry, 2013. "Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 119-127.
    2. De Brucker, Klaas & Macharis, Cathy & Verbeke, Alain, 2013. "Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 122-131.
    3. Arthur Lehner & Christoph Erlacher & Matthias Schlögl & Jacob Wegerer & Thomas Blaschke & Klaus Steinnocher, 2018. "Can ISO-Defined Urban Sustainability Indicators Be Derived from Remote Sensing: An Expert Weighting Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-31, April.
    4. Shanshan Fu & Xinping Yan & Di Zhang & Minyang Zhang, 2018. "Risk influencing factors analysis of Arctic maritime transportation systems: a Chinese perspective," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 439-455, May.
    5. Zhang, Chunqin & Juan, Zhicai & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2016. "Do the organizational forms affect passenger satisfaction? Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 129-148.
    6. Thomas L. Saaty, 2006. "The Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process, chapter 0, pages 1-26, Springer.
    7. Entani, Tomoe & Sugihara, Kazutomi, 2012. "Uncertainty index based interval assignment by Interval AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 379-385.
    8. Dea van Lierop & Madhav G. Badami & Ahmed M. El-Geneidy, 2018. "What influences satisfaction and loyalty in public transport? A review of the literature," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 52-72, January.
    9. Hrelja, Robert, 2015. "Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-13.
    10. Nassereddine, M. & Eskandari, H., 2017. "An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 427-439.
    11. Giuseppe Ioppolo & Stefano Cucurachi & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Saija & Lei Shi, 2016. "Sustainable Local Development and Environmental Governance: A Strategic Planning Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, February.
    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. Lo, Huai-Wei & Fang, Tzu-Yi & Lin, Sheng-Wei, 2024. "Integrating technological and strategic analysis: Evaluating the key determinants of transportation sustainability in taipei Mass Rapid Transit using the Rough-Fermatean DEMATEL approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Eric Tamatey Lawer & Johannes Herbeck & Michael Flitner, 2019. "Selective Adoption: How Port Authorities in Europe and West Africa Engage with the Globalizing ‘Green Port’ Idea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Swati Goyal & Shivi Agarwal & Narinderjit Singh Sawaran Singh & Trilok Mathur & Nirbhay Mathur, 2022. "Analysis of Hybrid MCDM Methods for the Performance Assessment and Ranking Public Transport Sector: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-21, November.
    5. Elzbieta Broniewicz & Karolina Ogrodnik, 2021. "A Comparative Evaluation of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods for Sustainable Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    6. Xiaohong Jiang & Huiying Wang & Xiucheng Guo & Xiaolin Gong, 2019. "Using the FAHP, ISM, and MICMAC Approaches to Study the Sustainability Influencing Factors of the Last Mile Delivery of Rural E-Commerce Logistics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Alejandro Sánchez-Atondo & Leonel García & Julio Calderón-Ramírez & José Manuel Gutiérrez-Moreno & Alejandro Mungaray-Moctezuma, 2020. "Understanding Public Transport Ridership in Developing Countries to Promote Sustainable Urban Mobility: A Case Study of Mexicali, Mexico," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Yakup Çelikbilek & Sarbast Moslem, 2023. "A grey multi criteria decision making application for analyzing the essential reasons of recurrent lane change," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 916-941, June.
    9. Mateusz Hämmerling & Joanna Kocięcka & Stanisław Zaborowski, 2021. "AHP as a Useful Tool in the Assessment of the Technical Condition of Hydrotechnical Constructions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-26, January.
    10. Dariusz Tłoczyński & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Sebastian Susmarski, 2022. "Analysis of Sustainable Transport Systems in Service of Selected SEA-EU Consortium Countries’ Airports—A Pilot Case Study of Passenger Choices for Gdańsk Airport," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Bin Liu & Huajian Fang & Xiaosheng Qin & Feilian Zhang & Jingjing Li, 2023. "An integrated multi‐criteria analysis framework of built reservoir with dam‐heightening‐based decision: China's largest water transfer programs for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 540-554, February.
    12. Xi Lu & Jiaqing Lu & Xinzheng Yang & Xumei Chen, 2022. "Assessment of Urban Mobility via a Pressure-State-Response (PSR) Model with the IVIF-AHP and FCE Methods: A Case Study of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, March.
    13. Elena García-Jiménez & Sara Poveda-Reyes & Gemma Dolores Molero & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia & Andrea Gorrini & Yvonne Hail & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Filomena Mauriello, 2020. "Methodology for Gender Analysis in Transport: Factors with Influence in Women’s Inclusion as Professionals and Users of Transport Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-32, May.
    14. Sarbast Moslem & Tiziana Campisi & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Szabolcs Duleba & Kh Md Nahiduzzaman & Giovanni Tesoriere, 2020. "Best–Worst Method for Modelling Mobility Choice after COVID-19: Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    15. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & Juan Palaguachi & Martin Ortega & Tiziana Campisi & Vincenza Torrisi, 2021. "An Integrated Multi Criteria Decision Making Model for Evaluating Park-and-Ride Facility Location Issue: A Case Study for Cuenca City in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-16, July.
    16. Hadi Jahanshahi & Zahra Alijani & Sanda Florentina Mihalache, 2023. "Towards Sustainable Transportation: A Review of Fuzzy Decision Systems and Supply Chain Serviceability," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    17. Ahmad Alkharabsheh & Sarbast Moslem & Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2021. "An Integrated Approach of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Grey Theory for Evaluating Urban Public Transportation Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    18. Collins Opoku Antwi & Jun Ren & Wenyu Zhang & Wilberforce Owusu-Ansah & Michael Osei Aboagye & Emmanuel Affum-Osei & Richard Adu Agyapong, 2022. "“I Am Here to Fly, but Better Get the Environment Right!” Passenger Response to Airport Servicescape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-24, August.

    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. Xu-Hui Li & Lin Huang & Qiang Li & Hu-Chen Liu, 2020. "Passenger Satisfaction Evaluation of Public Transportation Using Pythagorean Fuzzy MULTIMOORA Method under Large Group Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Allen, Jaime & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Rosell, Jordi, 2019. "Effect of a major network reform on bus transit satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 310-333.
    3. Nguyen-Phuoc, Duy Q. & Phuong Tran, Anh Thi & Nguyen, Tiep Van & Le, Phuong Thi & Su, Diep Ngoc, 2021. "Investigating the complexity of perceived service quality and perceived safety and security in building loyalty among bus passengers in Vietnam – A PLS-SEM approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 162-173.
    4. Wang, Jiangbo & Yamamoto, Toshiyuki & Liu, Kai, 2022. "Exploring the subscribing behavior of customized bus passengers: Active users versus inactive users," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    5. Juan de Oña, 2022. "Service quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions towards public transport from the point of view of private vehicle users," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 237-269, February.
    6. Sun, Fan & Jin, Minjie & Zhang, Tao & Huang, Wencheng, 2022. "Satisfaction differences in bus traveling among low-income individuals before and after COVID-19," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 311-332.
    7. Yao, Di & Xu, Liqun & Zhang, Chunqin & Li, Jinpei, 2021. "Revisiting the interactions between bus service quality, car ownership and mode use: A case study in Changzhou, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 329-344.
    8. Ahmad Nazrul Hakimi Ibrahim & Muhamad Nazri Borhan & Muhamad Razuhanafi Mat Yazid & Riza Atiq Rahmat & Sotaro Yukawa, 2021. "Factors Influencing Passengers’ Satisfaction with the Light Rail Transit Service in Alpha Cities: Evidence from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Using Structural Equation Modelling," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Sukhov, Alexandre & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2022. "Necessary and sufficient conditions for attractive public Transport: Combined use of PLS-SEM and NCA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 239-250.
    10. Tri Basuki Joewono & Ariel Matthew & Muhamad Rizki, 2021. "Loyalty of Paratransit Users in the Era of Competition with Ride Sourcing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    11. Juan Oña & Rocío Oña, 2023. "Is it possible to attract private vehicle users towards public transport? Understanding the key role of service quality, satisfaction and involvement on behavioral intentions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 1073-1101, June.
    12. Sarbast Moslem & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke & Szabolcs Duleba, 2019. "Analysing Stakeholder Consensus for a Sustainable Transport Development Decision by the Fuzzy AHP and Interval AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Muhammad Ashraf Javid & Nazam Ali & Syed Arif Hussain Shah & Muhammad Abdullah, 2021. "Travelers’ Attitudes Toward Mobile Application–Based Public Transport Services in Lahore," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    14. Qihao Liu & Yuzheng Liu & Chia-Lin Chen & Enrica Papa & Yantao Ling & Mengqiu Cao, 2023. "Is It Possible to Compete With Car Use? How Buses Can Facilitate Sustainable Transport," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 69-83.
    15. Stefan Greiving & Dietwald Gruehn & Christa Reicher, 2022. "The Rhenish Coal-Mining Area—Assessing the Transformational Talents and Challenges of a Region in Fundamental Structural Change," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Xuan Phuong Nguyen, 2019. "The Bus Transportation Issue And People Satisfaction With Public Transport In Ho Chi Minh City ," Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research & Developments (JMERD), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 42(1), pages 10-16, January.
    17. Toşa, Cristian & Sato, Hitomi & Morikawa, Takayuki & Miwa, Tomio, 2018. "Commuting behavior in emerging urban areas: Findings of a revealed-preferences and stated-intentions survey in Cluj-Napoca, Romania," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 78-93.
    18. Alina Kulczyk-Dynowska & Agnieszka Stacherzak, 2022. "The Impact of a City on Its Environment: The Prism of Demography and Selected Environmental and Technical Aspects Based on the Case of Major Lower Silesian Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Alessandro Vitale & Giuseppe Guido & Daniele Rogano, 2016. "A smartphone based DSS platform for assessing transit service attributes," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 315-340, September.
    20. Tan Yigitcanlar & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Hjalti Johannesson & Md Kamruzzaman & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Surabhi Pancholi, 2017. "Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2272-2292, December.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:9-:d:191961. 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.