IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i18p4960-d266246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framework of Aspects for the Evaluation of Multimodal Journey Planners

Author

Listed:
  • Domokos Esztergár-Kiss

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Faculty of Transportation Engineering and Vehicle Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 1119 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Nowadays, several journey planners are available for users with various functionalities. The aim of this research was to provide an overview of European journey planners considering the perspective of the user. Therefore, a framework of aspects was defined, which contains aspects of route planning services, booking and payment, handled data, and supplementary information. Based on these aspects, an evaluation method was elaborated to compare and rank the journey planners. The method consists of two main steps. First, the journey planners were compared (scoring) to each other, which resulted in the general evaluation number. In the scoring step, multi criteria analysis was adapted, because it produces clear and comparable results. As a second step different user groups were introduced and, using preferences of these groups (weighting), the average evaluation number was calculated. Finally, the elaborated method presented a quantified evaluation and ranking of multimodal journey planners, which supports choosing suitable journey planners for the users.

Suggested Citation

  • Domokos Esztergár-Kiss, 2019. "Framework of Aspects for the Evaluation of Multimodal Journey Planners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4960-:d:266246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4960/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4960/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    2. Bulckaen, Jeroen & Keseru, Imre & Macharis, Cathy, 2016. "Sustainability versus stakeholder preferences: Searching for synergies in urban and regional mobility measures," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 40-49.
    3. Barbosa, Samuel Borges & Ferreira, Marcelo Gitirana Gomes & Nickel, Elton Moura & Cruz, Jorge Alcides & Forcellini, Fernando Antônio & Garcia, Jéssica & Guerra, José Baltazar Salgueirinho Osório de An, 2017. "Multi-criteria analysis model to evaluate transport systems: An application in Florianópolis, Brazil," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 1-13.
    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. Lee, Deok-Joo, 2018. "A multi-criteria approach for prioritizing advanced public transport modes (APTM) considering urban types in Korea," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 148-161.
    2. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    3. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene, 2022. "Sustainable Development of Road Transport in the EU: Multi-Criteria Analysis of Countries’ Achievements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Deveci, Muhammet & Pamucar, Dragan & Gokasar, Ilgin & Isik, Mehtap & Coffman, D'Maris, 2022. "Fuzzy Einstein WASPAS approach for the economic and societal dynamics of the climate change mitigation strategies in urban mobility planning," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-17.
    5. Yan Xu & Chung-Hsing Yeh, 2017. "Sustainability-based selection decisions for e-waste recycling operations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 531-552, January.
    6. Yancang Li & Jing Yang & Huawang Shi & Yijie Li, 2017. "Assessment of sustainable urban transport development based on entropy and unascertained measure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-9, October.
    7. Pinar, Mehmet & Stengos, Thanasis & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "On the construction of a feasible range of multidimensional poverty under benchmark weight uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 415-427.
    8. Uroš Kramar & Dejan Dragan & Darja Topolšek, 2019. "The Holistic Approach to Urban Mobility Planning with a Modified Focus Group, SWOT, and Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-29, November.
    9. Nikoleta Mikušová & Gabriel Fedorko & Vieroslav Molnár & Martina Hlatká & Rudolf Kampf & Veronika Sirková, 2021. "Possibility of a Solution of the Sustainability of Transport and Mobility with the Application of Discrete Computer Simulation—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, September.
    10. Ali Bakdur & Fumito Masui & Michal Ptaszynski, 2021. "Predicting Increase in Demand for Public Buses in University Students Daily Life Needs: Case Study Based on a City in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-28, May.
    11. Alexander Kuan Daiy & Kao-Yi Shen & Jim-Yuh Huang & Tom Meng-Yen Lin, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Model for Evaluating Open Banking Business Partners," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    13. Sławomira Hajduk, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Analysis in the Decision-Making Approach for the Linear Ordering of Urban Transport Based on TOPSIS Technique," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-30, December.
    14. Jens Schippl & Annika Arnold, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Views on Multimodal Urban Mobility Futures: A Matter of Policy Interventions or Just the Logical Result of Digitalization?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, April.
    15. Justin Moskolaï Ngossaha & Raymond Houé Ngouna & Bernard Archimède & Mihaela-Hermina Negulescu & Alexandru-Ionut Petrişor, 2024. "Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility: A Multidimensional Ontology-Based Framework for Assessment and Consensus Decision-Making Using DS-AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-22, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Łukasz Muślewski & Marietta Markiewicz & Michał Pająk & Tomasz Kałaczyński & Davor Kolar, 2021. "Analysis of the Use of Fatty Acid Methyl Esters as an Additive to Diesel Fuel for Internal Combustion Engines," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-17, October.
    18. Akin, Darcin & Kara, Derya, 2020. "Multicriteria analysis of planned intercity bus terminals in the metropolitan city of Istanbul, Turkey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 465-489.
    19. Ahmad H. Alomari & Taisir S. Khedaywi & Asalah A. Jadah & Abdel Rahman O. Marian, 2022. "Evaluation of Public Transport among University Commuters in Rural Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-32, December.
    20. Andrii Shekhovtsov & Volodymyr Kozlov & Viktor Nosov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Efficiency of Methods for Determining the Relevance of Criteria in Sustainable Transport Problems: A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.

    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:2019:i:18:p:4960-:d:266246. 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.