IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v73y2019icp62-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing the application of participatory MCA: The case of the South Fylde Line

Author

Listed:
  • Dean, M.
  • Hickman, R.
  • Chen, C.-L.

Abstract

In recent decades, many authors have claimed that, compared to traditional appraisal techniques such as cost-benefit analysis (CBA), participatory multi-criteria analysis (MCA) methodologies represent a more effective approach to appraising transport projects, largely due to the range of criteria able to be used and the ability to reflect multiple viewpoints. This paper applies a participatory MCA process to appraise potential rail investments in North West England. The results of this analysis show that, while promising, participatory MCA processes also have several limitations, and successful application is subject to several issues which require careful consideration, including selection of participants, identification of appraisal criteria, and the process of assessing impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Dean, M. & Hickman, R. & Chen, C.-L., 2019. "Testing the application of participatory MCA: The case of the South Fylde Line," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 62-70.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:73:y:2019:i:c:p:62-70
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.10.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X18301380
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.10.007?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. Vickerman, R., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies for transport projects in the United Kingdom," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 7-16, January.
    2. Robin Hickman & Moshe Givoni & David Bonilla & David Banister (ed.), 2015. "Handbook on Transport and Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14586.
    3. Hickman, Robin & Ashiru, Olu & Banister, David, 2010. "Transport and climate change: Simulating the options for carbon reduction in London," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 110-125, March.
    4. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    5. Macharis, Cathy & De Witte, Astrid & Turcksin, Laurence, 2010. "The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) application in the Flemish long-term decision making process on mobility and logistics," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 303-311, September.
    6. Agbelie, Bismark R.D.K., 2014. "An empirical analysis of three econometric frameworks for evaluating economic impacts of transportation infrastructure expenditures across countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 304-310.
    7. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    8. Cathy Macharis, 2007. "Multi-criteria Analysis as a Tool to Include Stakeholders in Project Evaluation: The MAMCA Method," Chapters, in: Elvira Haezendonck (ed.), Transport Project Evaluation, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Leo Dobes & Jeff Bennett, 2009. "Multi-Criteria Analysis: "Good Enough" for Government Work?," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 16(3), pages 7-30.
    10. Wendy Proctor & Martin Drechsler, 2006. "Deliberative Multicriteria Evaluation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(2), pages 169-190, April.
    11. Bruzelius, Nils & Flyvbjerg, Bent & Rothengatter, Werner, 2002. "Big decisions, big risks. Improving accountability in mega projects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 143-154, April.
    12. Lucas, Karen, 2012. "Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 105-113.
    13. Leyva-Lopez, Juan Carlos & Fernandez-Gonzalez, Eduardo, 2003. "A new method for group decision support based on ELECTRE III methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 14-27, July.
    14. Dodgson, JS & Spackman, M & Pearman, A & Phillips, LD, 2009. "Multi-criteria analysis: a manual," Economic History Working Papers 12761, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    15. Ward, E. John & Dimitriou, Harry T. & Dean, Marco, 2016. "Theory and background of multi-criteria analysis: Toward a policy-led approach to mega transport infrastructure project appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 21-45.
    16. Kenneth J. Arrow & Herve Raynaud, 1986. "Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511754, December.
    17. Giuseppe Munda, 2008. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73703-2, September.
    18. Andy Stirling & Sue Mayer, 2001. "A Novel Approach to the Appraisal of Technological Risk: A Multicriteria Mapping Study of a Genetically Modified Crop," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 529-555, August.
    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. Mouter, Niek & Koster, Paul & Dekker, Thijs, 2021. "Contrasting the recommendations of participatory value evaluation and cost-benefit analysis in the context of urban mobility investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 54-73.
    2. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.

    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. Dean, M., 2021. "Participatory multi-criteria analysis methods: Comprehensive, inclusive, transparent and user-friendly? An application to the case of the London Gateway Port," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Miller, Harvey J. & Witlox, Frank & Tribby, Calvin P., 2013. "Developing context-sensitive livability indicators for transportation planning: a measurement framework," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 51-64.
    4. Daniel Kaszubowski, 2019. "A Method for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Transport Models as a Tool for Improving the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Cathy Macharis & Peter Nijkamp, 2013. "Multi-actor and multi-criteria analysis in evaluating mega-projects," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 11, pages 242-266, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    7. Andonegi, Aitor & Garmendia, Eneko & Aldezabal, Arantza, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation for managing biodiversity conservation conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Alessio Ishizaka & Philippe Nemery, 2013. "A Multi-Criteria Group Decision Framework for Partner Grouping When Sharing Facilities," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 773-799, July.
    9. Giuseppe Munda, 2015. "Beyond Gdp: An Overview Of Measurement Issues In Redefining ‘Wealth’," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 403-422, July.
    10. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    11. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    12. Azzini, Ivano & Munda, Giuseppe, 2020. "A new approach for identifying the Kemeny median ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 388-401.
    13. Suzana de Suzana Dantas Daher & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2012. "The Use of Ranking Veto Concept to Mitigate the Compensatory Effects of Additive Aggregation in Group Decisions on a Water Utility Automation Investment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 185-204, March.
    14. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 337-354, December.
    15. Sun, Hui & Zhang, Yiting & Wang, Yuning & Li, Lei & Sheng, Yun, 2015. "A social stakeholder support assessment of low-carbon transport policy based on multi-actor multi-criteria analysis: The case of Tianjin," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 103-116.
    16. 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.
    17. Benevenuto, Rodolfo & Caulfield, Brian, 2020. "Examining transport needs in the global south using a screening framework," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.
    20. Giuseppe Munda, 2022. "Qualitative reasoning or quantitative aggregation rules for impact assessment of policy options? A multiple criteria framework," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 3259-3277, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:trapol:v:73:y:2019:i:c:p:62-70. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.