IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i23p9854-d450891.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Sustainable Evaluation Processes for Investments in the Transport Sector: A Combined Multi-Criteria and Cost–Benefit Analysis for a New Highway in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Ilaria Henke

    (Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, University of Naples “Federico II”, 80125 Napoli, Italy)

  • Armando Cartenì

    (Department of Engineering, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa, Italy)

  • Luigi Di Francesco

    (Department of Engineering, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa, Italy)

Abstract

In the transport sector, a rational and shared planning process is commonly based on the comparison of different design alternatives through quantitative evaluations and stakeholders’ engagement. Among the most adopted evaluation methods, there are cost–benefit analysis (CBA) and multi-criteria analysis (MCA). Both these methods have strengths and weaknesses, which do not allow the conclusion that one technique is dominant over the other. Starting from these considerations, the aim of this paper is to propose a sustainable evaluation process for investments in the transport sector, based on the combined use of both CBA and MCA analysis and a stakeholders’ engagement. The proposed evaluation method was also applied to a real case study: the decision-making process for a new highway in a high naturalistic and touristic area in north of Italy. Furthermore, a “weighted criteria process definition” based on the Delphi method was also performed within a public engagement process. Research results show that the application of both the evaluation analyses (CBA and MCA) allows the selection of the most rational althernative from a sustainable, shared and technical point of view. Precisely, the estimations performed underline that the CBA analysis significantly underestimated the non-users’ benefits, while the opposite occurred for the MCA analysis. The incidence of the non-users’ benefits is only the 14% of the total for the CBA, while it reaches more than the 79% for the MCA. This result is very relevant underling how, for a decision-making processes aimed in comparing different design alternatives for which non-users impacts are expected as relevant against the users ones, the unique application of the most consolidated CBA analyses are not always adequate, while the joint use of the two evaluation methods ensures robust and rational choices for a sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilaria Henke & Armando Cartenì & Luigi Di Francesco, 2020. "A Sustainable Evaluation Processes for Investments in the Transport Sector: A Combined Multi-Criteria and Cost–Benefit Analysis for a New Highway in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-26, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:23:p:9854-:d:450891
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/23/9854/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/23/9854/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando & Henke, Ilaria & Pagliara, Francesca, 2020. "Economic growth, transport accessibility and regional equity impacts of high-speed railways in Italy: ten years ex post evaluation and future perspectives," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 412-428.
    2. Aleksandras Krylovas & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Natalja Kosareva & Stanislav Dadelo, 2014. "New KEMIRA Method for Determining Criteria Priority and Weights in Solving MCDM Problem," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(06), pages 1119-1133.
    3. Hickman, Robin & Saxena, Sharad & Banister, David & Ashiru, Olu, 2012. "Examining transport futures with scenario analysis and MCA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 560-575.
    4. Itoh, Ryo, 2018. "Is transportation infrastructure cost recoverable under the risk of disasters?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 457-465.
    5. Cartenì, Armando & Cascetta, Ennio & de Luca, Stefano, 2016. "A random utility model for park & carsharing services and the pure preference for electric vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 49-59.
    6. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Tsamboulas, Dimitrios A., 2007. "A tool for prioritizing multinational transport infrastructure investments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 11-26, January.
    9. Armando Cartenì & Ilaria Henke & Clorinda Molitierno & Luigi Di Francesco, 2020. "Strong Sustainability in Public Transport Policies: An e-Mobility Bus Fleet Application in Sorrento Peninsula (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Ilaria Henke & Armando Cartenì & Clorinda Molitierno & Assunta Errico, 2020. "Decision-Making in the Transport Sector: A Sustainable Evaluation Method for Road Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    11. Gerardo Marletto, 2010. "Transalpine Transport Policies: Towards A Shared Approach," Articles, International Journal of Transport Economics, vol. 37(3).
    12. Awasthi, Anjali & Omrani, Hichem & Gerber, Philippe, 2018. "Investigating ideal-solution based multicriteria decision making techniques for sustainability evaluation of urban mobility projects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 247-259.
    13. Armando Cartenì & Luca D’Acierno & Mariano Gallo, 2020. "A Rational Decision-Making Process with Public Engagement for Designing Public Transport Services: A Real Case Application in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    14. de Luca, Stefano, 2014. "Public engagement in strategic transportation planning: An analytic hierarchy process based approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 110-124.
    15. Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando & Pagliara, Francesca & Montanino, Marcello, 2015. "A new look at planning and designing transportation systems: A decision-making model based on cognitive rationality, stakeholder engagement and quantitative methods," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 27-39.
    16. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Payam Khazaelpour & Fausto Cavallaro, 2018. "The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    17. Roy, Bernard & Vincke, Philippe, 1981. "Multicriteria analysis: survey and new directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 207-218, November.
    18. Cantarella, Giulio Erberto & Cartenì, Armando & de Luca, Stefano, 2015. "Stochastic equilibrium assignment with variable demand: Theoretical and implementation issues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(2), pages 330-347.
    19. Guimarães, Vanessa de Almeida & Leal Junior, Ilton Curty & da Silva, Marcelino Aurélio Vieira, 2018. "Evaluating the sustainability of urban passenger transportation by Monte Carlo simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 732-752.
    20. Turró, Mateu & Penyalver, Domingo, 2019. "Hunting white elephants on the road. A practical procedure to detect harmful projects of transport infrastructure," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 3-20.
    21. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    22. Cartenì, Armando & Pariota, Luigi & Henke, Ilaria, 2017. "Hedonic value of high-speed rail services: Quantitative analysis of the students’ domestic tourist attractiveness of the main Italian cities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 348-365.
    23. Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando & Montanino, Marcello, 2016. "A behavioral model of accessibility based on the number of available opportunities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 45-58.
    24. Gianluigi De Mare & Maria Fiorella Granata & Antonio Nesticò, 2015. "Weak and Strong Compensation for the Prioritization of Public Investments: Multidimensional Analysis for Pools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-17, December.
    25. Mehdi KESHAVARZ GHORABAEE & Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS & Zenonas TURSKIS & Jurgita ANTUCHEVICIENE, 2016. "A New Combinative Distance-Based Assessment(Codas) Method For Multi-Criteria Decision-Making," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 50(3), pages 25-44.
    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. Armando Cartenì & Furio Cascetta & Luigi Di Francesco & Felisia Palermo, 2021. "Particulate Matter Short-Term Exposition, Mobility Trips and COVID-19 Diffusion: A Correlation Analyses for the Italian Case Study at Urban Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Sina Shokoohyar & Amirsalar Jafari Gorizi & Vahid Ghomi & Weimin Liang & Hak J. Kim, 2022. "Sustainable Transportation in Practice: A Systematic Quantitative Review of Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Biancardo, Salvatore Antonio & Gesualdi, Michele & Savastano, Davide & Intignano, Mattia & Henke, Ilaria & Pagliara, Francesca, 2023. "An innovative framework for integrating Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) within Building Information Modeling (BIM)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. 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.

    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. Ilaria Henke & Armando Cartenì & Clorinda Molitierno & Assunta Errico, 2020. "Decision-Making in the Transport Sector: A Sustainable Evaluation Method for Road Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Armando Cartenì & Luca D’Acierno & Mariano Gallo, 2020. "A Rational Decision-Making Process with Public Engagement for Designing Public Transport Services: A Real Case Application in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    3. Armando Cartenì & Ilaria Henke, 2022. "Transportation Planning, Mobility Habits and Sustainable Development in the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-8, March.
    4. Mustafa Hamurcu & Tamer Eren, 2020. "Strategic Planning Based on Sustainability for Urban Transportation: An Application to Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Armando Cartenì & Ilaria Henke & Clorinda Molitierno & Luigi Di Francesco, 2020. "Strong Sustainability in Public Transport Policies: An e-Mobility Bus Fleet Application in Sorrento Peninsula (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Mladen Krstić & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Snežana Tadić & Milovan Kovač & Pier Paolo Miglietta, 2023. "A Novel Axial-Distance-Based Aggregated Measurement (ADAM) Method for the Evaluation of Agri-Food Circular-Economy-Based Business Models," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, March.
    7. Henke, Ilaria & Moyano, Amparo & Pagliara, Francesca, 2023. "Influence of high-speed rail on the decentralisation of events from big metropolitan areas to smaller intermediate cities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    8. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Payam Khazaelpour & Fausto Cavallaro, 2018. "The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    9. Mladen Krstić & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Snežana Tadić & Violeta Roso, 2022. "Applicability of Industry 4.0 Technologies in the Reverse Logistics: A Circular Economy Approach Based on COmprehensive Distance Based RAnking (COBRA) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, May.
    10. Baumann, Manuel & Weil, Marcel & Peters, Jens F. & Chibeles-Martins, Nelson & Moniz, Antonio B., 2019. "A review of multi-criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy storage systems for grid applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 516-534.
    11. Cartenì, Armando & Pariota, Luigi & Henke, Ilaria, 2017. "Hedonic value of high-speed rail services: Quantitative analysis of the students’ domestic tourist attractiveness of the main Italian cities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 348-365.
    12. 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.
    13. Kavitha, S. & Satheeshkumar, J. & Amudha, T., 2024. "Multi-label feature selection using q-rung orthopair hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach extended to CODAS," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 148-173.
    14. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    15. Di Matteo, Dante & Mariotti, Ilaria & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Transport infrastructure and economic performance: An evaluation of the Milan-Bologna high-speed rail corridor," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Hamideh Asadi & Gholamreza Shams & Jolanta Tamošaitienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2021. "Model for the Sustainable Material Selection by Applying Integrated Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    17. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Dragan Pamučar & Fatih Ecer & Goran Cirovic & Melfi A. Arlasheedi, 2020. "Application of Improved Best Worst Method (BWM) in Real-World Problems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    19. Chao Song & Jian-Qiang Wang & Jun-Bo Li, 2020. "New Framework for Quality Function Deployment Using Linguistic Z-Numbers," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-20, February.
    20. Snežana Tadić & Mladen Krstić & Violeta Roso & Nikolina Brnjac, 2020. "Dry Port Terminal Location Selection by Applying the Hybrid Grey MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.

    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:12:y:2020:i:23:p:9854-:d:450891. 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.