IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pubtra/v8y2016i3d10.1007_s12469-016-0146-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing multiple criteria for rapid bus routes in the public transport system in Vilnius

Author

Listed:
  • Marius Jakimavičius

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University)

  • Marija Burinskienė

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University)

  • Modesta Gusarovienė

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University)

  • Askoldas Podviezko

    (Mykolas Romeris University)

Abstract

The paper considers the technological development of rapid bus routes in the network of Vilnius public transport. All rapid bus routes of the scheme for Vilnius public transport are presented and analysed with reference to the selected system of criteria. This article describes the situation of the public transport system in Vilnius and shows the influence of rapid bus routes. The paper also analyses parameters for the lines used for the multiple attribute ranking of rapid bus routes in Vilnius city. Multi-criteria methods have been chosen to rank six rapid bus routes and to estimate the best and most effective alternative based on the preferred technological and financial data. The experts of different decision-making groups have analyzed the importance of parameters selected for assessing alternatives to ranking rapid bus routes. The experts on the transport system have been invited to determine the relative weights of the defined criteria. Three techniques, including analytical hierarchical process, simple additive weighting and TOPSIS methods have been used and compared to determine the most efficient rapid bus route based on economic and technological parameters. To rank alternatives and to make a comparison of the obtained calculation results, three multi-criteria methods have been applied in this research.

Suggested Citation

  • Marius Jakimavičius & Marija Burinskienė & Modesta Gusarovienė & Askoldas Podviezko, 2016. "Assessing multiple criteria for rapid bus routes in the public transport system in Vilnius," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 365-385, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pubtra:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0146-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s12469-016-0146-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12469-016-0146-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12469-016-0146-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    2. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    3. Robert Joumard & Jean-Pierre Nicolas, 2010. "Transport project assessment methodology within the framework of sustainable development," Post-Print halshs-00456645, HAL.
    4. Valentinas Podvezko, 2009. "Application of AHP technique," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 181-189, March.
    5. Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Roumboutsos, Athena, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of decision making during construction on transport project outcome," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 369-380, November.
    6. Valentinas Podvezko, 2007. "Determining the level of agreement of expert estimates," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(5/6), pages 586-600.
    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. Virginija Grybaite & Jelena Stankeviciene & Giedre Lapinskiene & Askoldas Podvezko, 2022. "Comparison of the Environment of EU Countries for Sharing Economy State by Modern Multiple Criteria Methods," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 24(59), pages 194-194.

    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. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Ioannis Sitaridis & Fotis Kitsios, 2020. "Competitiveness analysis and evaluation of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a multi-criteria approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 377-399, November.
    3. Villacreses, Geovanna & Gaona, Gabriel & Martínez-Gómez, Javier & Jijón, Diego Juan, 2017. "Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: The case of continental Ecuador," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 275-286.
    4. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    5. Sadhan Malik & Subodh Chandra Pal & Biswajit Das & Rabin Chakrabortty, 2020. "Assessment of vegetation status of Sali River basin, a tributary of Damodar River in Bankura District, West Bengal, using satellite data," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 5651-5685, August.
    6. Styliani Karamountzou & Dimitra G. Vagiona, 2023. "Suitability and Sustainability Assessment of Existing Onshore Wind Farms in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Kuldeep Kavta & Arkopal K. Goswami, 2021. "A methodological framework for a priori selection of travel demand management package using fuzzy MCDM methods," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3059-3084, December.
    8. Rudimar Caricimi & Géremi Gilson Dranka & Dalmarino Setti & Paula Ferreira, 2022. "Reframing the Selection of Hydraulic Turbines Integrating Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy VIKOR Multi-Criteria Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Dragan Pamučar & Ibrahim Badi & Korica Sanja & Radojko Obradović, 2018. "A Novel Approach for the Selection of Power-Generation Technology Using a Linguistic Neutrosophic CODAS Method: A Case Study in Libya," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-25, September.
    10. Hasan Zabihi & Mohsen Alizadeh & Philip Kibet Langat & Mohammadreza Karami & Himan Shahabi & Anuar Ahmad & Mohamad Nor Said & Saro Lee, 2019. "GIS Multi-Criteria Analysis by Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA): Toward an Integrated Citrus Management Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    11. Muhammad Ikram & Qingyu Zhang & Robert Sroufe, 2020. "Developing integrated management systems using an AHP‐Fuzzy VIKOR approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2265-2283, September.
    12. Iwaro, Joseph & Mwasha, Abrahams & Williams, Rupert G. & Zico, Ricardo, 2014. "An Integrated Criteria Weighting Framework for the sustainable performance assessment and design of building envelope," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 417-434.
    13. Chia-Liang Lin & Jwu-Jenq Chen & Yu-Yu Ma, 2023. "Ranking of Service Quality Solution for Blended Design Teaching Using Fuzzy ANP and TOPSIS in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, March.
    14. Oliveira, Gilson Adamczuk & Tan, Kim Hua & Guedes, Bruno Turmina, 2018. "Lean and green approach: An evaluation tool for new product development focused on small and medium enterprises," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 62-73.
    15. Misbah Anjum & Vernika Agarwal & P. K. Kapur & Sunil Kumar Khatri, 2020. "Two-phase methodology for prioritization and utility assessment of software vulnerabilities," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(2), pages 289-300, July.
    16. Irina Vinogradova, 2019. "Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    17. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    18. Mir Seyed Mohammad Mohsen Emamat & Caroline Maria de Miranda Mota & Mohammad Reza Mehregan & Mohammad Reza Sadeghi Moghadam & Philippe Nemery, 2022. "Using ELECTRE-TRI and FlowSort methods in a stock portfolio selection context," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, December.
    19. Sarah Ben Amor & Fateh Belaid & Ramzi Benkraiem & Boumediene Ramdani & Khaled Guesmi, 2023. "Multi-criteria classification, sorting, and clustering: a bibliometric review and research agenda," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 771-793, June.
    20. Ping Heidi Huang & Tzuong-tsieng Moh, 2017. "A non-linear non-weight method for multi-criteria decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 239-251, January.

    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:spr:pubtra:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0146-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.