IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijmore/v14y2019i4p495-516.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geolocation of electric bikes recharging stations: City of Quito study case

Author

Listed:
  • Geovanna Villacreses
  • Javier Martínez-Gómez
  • Paola Quintana
  • Ricardo A. Narváez C.

Abstract

The aim of this research was to develop a geographical information system with multi-criteria decision making methods for selecting the most feasible location to install electric bikes recharging stations in the City of Quito. For such purpose, the ideal solution-similarity preference ranking and weighted overlay techniques have been used as multi-criteria decision making methods. In addition, the analytic hierarchy process method was performed for calculating the weights of each criterion. Moreover, a standardisation process that consists of establishing an overall performance index to evaluate the results was applied. Finally, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyse mutual correspondence between multi-criteria decision making methods. The resulting Pearson correlation coefficients indicate that the two selected multi-criteria decision making methods provided similar results. In this context, the methods analysed covered similar solutions and indicated that multi-criteria decision making methods are a powerful tool to select ideal locations for electric bikes recharging stations.

Suggested Citation

  • Geovanna Villacreses & Javier Martínez-Gómez & Paola Quintana & Ricardo A. Narváez C., 2019. "Geolocation of electric bikes recharging stations: City of Quito study case," International Journal of Mathematics in Operational Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(4), pages 495-516.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijmore:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:495-516
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=100735
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ids:ijmore:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:495-516. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=320 .

    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.