American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture
ISSN (Print): 2328-398X ISSN (Online): 2328-3998 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/ajcea Editor-in-chief: Mohammad Arif Kamal
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture. 2015, 3(6), 193-199
DOI: 10.12691/ajcea-3-6-1
Open AccessArticle

Scenario-based Multi-criteria Prioritization Framework for Urban Transportation Projects

Muqing Liu1, Vahid Balali2, , Hsi-Hsien Wei3 and Feniosky A. Peña-Mora1

1Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, Columbia University, New York, USA

2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, USA

3Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, USA

Pub. Date: October 31, 2015

Cite this paper:
Muqing Liu, Vahid Balali, Hsi-Hsien Wei and Feniosky A. Peña-Mora. Scenario-based Multi-criteria Prioritization Framework for Urban Transportation Projects. American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture. 2015; 3(6):193-199. doi: 10.12691/ajcea-3-6-1

Abstract

Given unprecedented levels of urbanization and motorization in addition to deteriorating infrastructure in developed countries, cities around the world have been facing the enormous challenge of delivering sustainable forms of infrastructure with fewer resources. The challenges in urban infrastructure investment become even more daunting as manifested by the staggering size of infrastructure funding gap. Therefore, prioritizing projects at the system level based on transparent and evidenced-based decision-making processes has emerged as one of the most promising ways to bridge enormous funding gaps especially for developing countries. To address the current limitations, this paper proposes a scenario-based multi-criteria prioritization framework for urban transportation projects in developing countries and then formulates it. This is done with the efficient use of pre-existing project evaluation information and emergent scenario of various stakeholders’ inputs. The framework is applied to set priorities for nine recent urban transportation projects constructed within a two-year framework in the Tianjin Binhai New Area, China. The results show that the proposed framework could serve as a consistent, robust, and comprehensive infrastructure project prioritization strategy that reconciles diverse perspectives among stakeholders. It also introduces sustainability in urban transportation decision making and links the prioritization process to the transportation planning that precedes it.

Keywords:
multi-criteria decision analysis scenario-based planning project prioritization strategy project programming group decision making urban transportation

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Figures

Figure of 3

References:

[1]  Dobbs, R., Infrastructure productivity: how to save $1 trillion a year. 2013: McKinsey.
 
[2]  Moore, R. and S. Kerr, On a highway to help: multilateral development bank financing and support for infrastructure. 2014.
 
[3]  Cullen, D., ASCE: Infrastructure-funding gap must be bridged. Fleet Owner, 2013.
 
[4]  Ziara, M., et al., Strategic implementation of infrastructure priority projects: case study in Palestine. Journal of infrastructure systems, 2002. 8(1): p. 2-11.
 
[5]  Zegras, C., J. Sussman, and C. Conklin, Scenario planning for strategic regional transportation planning. Journal of urban planning and development, 2004. 130(1): p. 2-13.
 
[6]  Jones, S., M. Tefe, and S. Appiah-Opoku, Proposed framework for sustainability screening of urban transport projects in developing countries: A case study of Accra, Ghana. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2013. 49: p. 21-34.
 
[7]  Karvetski, C.W., J.H. Lambert, and I. Linkov, Emergent conditions and multiple criteria analysis in infrastructure prioritization for developing countries. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 2009. 16(5-6): p. 125-137.
 
[8]  Liu, Z. and G. Smith, China: Building institutions for sustainable urban transport, in Emerging Urban Tranpsort Challenges: A Perspective2006, Eastr Working Paper.
 
[9]  FHWA, FHWA Scenario Planning Guidebook, 2011.
 
[10]  Jensen, A.V., Appraisal of Transport Projects: Assessing Robustness in Decision Making, 2012, Ph. D afhandling, Institut for Transport, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet.
 
[11]  Kalhor, R., H. Akbarshahi, and S.W. Case. Multi-Objective Optimization of Axial Crush Performance of Square Metal–Composite Hybrid Tubes. in ASME 2013 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. 2013. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
 
[12]  Belton, V. and T. Stewart, Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. 2002: Springer.
 
[13]  Schutte, I. and A. Brits, Prioritising transport infrastructure projects: towards a multi-criterion analysis. Southern African Business Review, 2013. 16(3): p. 97-117.
 
[14]  Tsamboulas, D.A., A tool for prioritizing multinational transport infrastructure investments. Transport Policy, 2007. 14(1): p. 11-26.
 
[15]  Goodman, A.S. and M. Hastak. Infrastructure planning handbook: planning, engineering, and economics. 2006. ASCE.
 
[16]  Balali, V., et al., Selection of Appropriate Material, Construction Technique, and Structural System of Bridges by Use of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (TRR), 2014(2431): p. 78-87.
 
[17]  Balali, V., B. Zahraie, and A. Roozbahani, Integration of ELECTRE III and PROMETHEE II Decision-Making Methods with an Interval Approach: Application in Selection of Appropriate Structural Systems. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2012. 28(2): p. 297-314.
 
[18]  Balali, V., B. Zahraie, and A. Roozbahani, A Comparison of AHP and PROMETHEE Family Decision Making Methods for Selection of Building Structural System. American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 2014. 2(5): p. 149-159.
 
[19]  Tsamboulas, D., G. Yiotis, and K. Panou, Use of multicriteria methods for assessment of transport projects. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 1999. 125(5): p. 407-414.
 
[20]  Berechman, J. and R.E. Paaswell, Evaluation, prioritization and selection of transportation investment projects in New York City. Transportation, 2005. 32(3): p. 223-249.
 
[21]  Iniestra, J.G. and J.G. Gutiérrez, Multicriteria decisions on interdependent infrastructure transportation projects using an evolutionary-based framework. Applied Soft Computing, 2009. 9(2): p. 512-526.
 
[22]  Sinha, K.C. and S. Labi, Transportation decision making: Principles of project evaluation and programming. 2011: John Wiley & Sons.
 
[23]  Hill, M., Planning for Multiple Objectives. An Approach to the Evaluation of Transportation Plans, 1973.
 
[24]  Won, J., Multicriteria evaluation approaches to urban transportation projects. Urban Studies, 1990. 27(1): p. 119-138.
 
[25]  Ram, C., G. Montibeller, and A. Morton, Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2011. 62(5): p. 817-829.
 
[26]  Lambert, J.H., et al., Prioritizing infrastructure investments in Afghanistan with multiagency stakeholders and deep uncertainty of emergent conditions. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 2011. 18(2): p. 155-166.
 
[27]  Karvetski, C.W., et al., Integration of decision analysis and scenario planning for coastal engineering and climate change. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on, 2011. 41(1): p. 63-73.
 
[28]  Schroeder, M.J. and J.H. Lambert, Scenario‐based multiple criteria analysis for infrastructure policy impacts and planning. Journal of Risk Research, 2010. 14(2): p. 191-214.
 
[29]  Meyer, M.D. and E.J. Miller, Urban transportation planning: a decision-oriented approach. 2001.
 
[30]  Richardson, A.J., E.S. Ampt, and A.H. Meyburg, Survey methods for transport planning. 1995: Eucalyptus Press Melbourne.
 
[31]  Morais, D.C. and A.T. de Almeida, Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings. Omega, 2012. 40(1): p. 42-52.
 
[32]  Belle, I., FROM ECONOMIC GROWTH TO SUSTAINABLE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT? THE CASE OF CHINA'S TIANJIN BINHAI NEW AREA. Regions Magazine, 2011. 282(1): p. 15-18.
 
[33]  Zhu, X. and B. Sun, Tianjin Binhai New Area: A Case Study of Multi-Level Streams Model of Chinese Decision-Making. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 2009. 14(2): p. 191-211.
 
[34]  Institute, W.B., Integrated Urban Transport Planning, 2011.
 
[35]  Mihyeon Jeon, C. and A. Amekudzi, Addressing sustainability in transportation systems: definitions, indicators, and metrics. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 2005. 11(1): p. 31-50.
 
[36]  Litman, T., Sustainable transportation indicators. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2003. 100.
 
[37]  McIlwee, J.S. and J.G. Robinson, Women in engineering: Gender, power, and workplace culture. 1992: SUNY Press.
 
[38]  Neter, J., R.A. Leitch, and S.E. Fienberg, Dollar unit sampling: Multinomial bounds for total overstatement and understatement errors. Accounting Review, 1978: p. 77-93.
 
[39]  Dillman, D.A., Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method--2007 Update with new Internet, visual, and mixed-mode guide. 2011: John Wiley & Sons.