IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i15p6067-d391152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Sustainable Mobility Measures Applying Multicriteria Decision Making Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Jonas Damidavičius

    (Department of Roads, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, 2510 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Marija Burinskienė

    (Department of Roads, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, 2510 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Jurgita Antuchevičienė

    (Department of Construction Management and Real Estate, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, 2510 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

An increasing number of recent discussions have focused on the need for designing transport systems in consonance with the importance of the environment, thus promoting investment in the growth of non-motorized transport infrastructure. Under such conditions, the demand for implementing the most effective infrastructure measures has a profoundly positive impact, and requires the least possible financial and human resources. The development of the concept of sustainable mobility puts emphasis on the integrated planning of transport systems, and pays major attention to the expansion of non-motorized and public transport, and different sharing systems, as well as to effective traffic management involving intelligent transport systems. The development of transport infrastructure requires massive investment, and hence the proper use of mobility measures is one of the most important objectives for the rational planning of sustainable transport systems. To achieve this established goal, this article examines a compiled set of mobility measures and identifies the significance of the preferred tools, which involve sustainable mobility experts. The paper also applies multicriteria decision making methods in assessing urban transport systems and their potential in terms of sustainable mobility. Multicriteria decision making methods have been successfully used for assessing the effectiveness of sustainable transport systems, and for comparing them between cities. The proposed universal evaluation model is applied to similar types of cities. The article explores the adaptability of the model by assessing big Lithuanian cities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonas Damidavičius & Marija Burinskienė & Jurgita Antuchevičienė, 2020. "Assessing Sustainable Mobility Measures Applying Multicriteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:15:p:6067-:d:391152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/15/6067/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/15/6067/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 2001. "Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 1-47, February.
    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. Chakhtoura, Céline & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "Indicator-based evaluation of sustainable transport plans: A framework for Paris and other large cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 15-28.
    4. Arsenio, Elisabete & Martens, Karel & Di Ciommo, Floridea, 2016. "Sustainable urban mobility plans: Bridging climate change and equity targets?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 30-39.
    5. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2007. "A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 291-297, April.
    6. Nocera, Silvio & Tonin, Stefania & Cavallaro, Federico, 2015. "Carbon estimation and urban mobility plans: Opportunities in a context of austerity," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 71-82.
    7. May, Anthony D. & Kelly, Charlotte & Shepherd, Simon & Jopson, Ann, 2012. "An option generation tool for potential urban transport policy packages," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 162-173.
    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. Simona Zapolskytė & Vaida Vabuolytė & Marija Burinskienė & Jurgita Antuchevičienė, 2020. "Assessment of Sustainable Mobility by MCDM Methods in the Science and Technology Parks of Vilnius, Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Marzena Kramarz & Edyta Przybylska, 2021. "Multimodal Transport in the Context of Sustainable Development of a City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-29, February.
    3. Yunqiang Xue & Lin Cheng & Haoran Jiang & Jun Guo & Hongzhi Guan, 2023. "The Optimization of Bus Departure Time Based on Uncertainty Theory—Taking No. 207 Bus Line of Nanchang City, China, as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Gülay Demir & Milanko Damjanović & Boško Matović & Radoje Vujadinović, 2022. "Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility by Using Fuzzy-FUCOM and Fuzzy-CoCoSo Methods: The Case of the SUMP Podgorica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-27, April.
    5. Dietmar Göhlich & Kai Nagel & Anne Magdalene Syré & Alexander Grahle & Kai Martins-Turner & Ricardo Ewert & Ricardo Miranda Jahn & Dominic Jefferies, 2021. "Integrated Approach for the Assessment of Strategies for the Decarbonization of Urban Traffic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-31, January.
    6. Lisa Kraus & Heike Proff, 2021. "Sustainable Urban Transportation Criteria and Measurement—A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-21, June.
    7. Elzbieta Broniewicz & Karolina Ogrodnik, 2021. "A Comparative Evaluation of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods for Sustainable Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.

    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. Suprava Chakraborty & Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar & Arunkumar Jayakumar & Santanu Kumar Dash & Devaraj Elangovan, 2021. "Selected Aspects of Sustainable Mobility Reveals Implementable Approaches and Conceivable Actions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-31, November.
    2. Mozos-Blanco, Miguel Ángel & Pozo-Menéndez, Elisa & Arce-Ruiz, Rosa & Baucells-Aletà, Neus, 2018. "The way to sustainable mobility. A comparative analysis of sustainable mobility plans in Spain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 45-54.
    3. Wen-Min Lu & Qian Long Kweh & Chung-Wei Wang, 2021. "Integration and application of rough sets and data envelopment analysis for assessments of the investment trusts industry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 163-194, January.
    4. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2014. "Benefit-of-the-doubt aggregation and the diet problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 33-35.
    5. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    6. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    7. Doumpos, M. & Marinakis, Y. & Marinaki, M. & Zopounidis, C., 2009. "An evolutionary approach to construction of outranking models for multicriteria classification: The case of the ELECTRE TRI method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 496-505, December.
    8. Skorupski, Jacek & Uchroński, Piotr, 2017. "A fuzzy model for evaluating metal detection equipment at airport security screening checkpoints," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 39-48.
    9. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    10. Romanika Okraszewska & Aleksandra Romanowska & Marcin Wołek & Jacek Oskarbski & Krystian Birr & Kazimierz Jamroz, 2018. "Integration of a Multilevel Transport System Model into Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4080 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Becchio, Cristina & Bottero, Marta Carla & Corgnati, Stefano Paolo & Dell’Anna, Federico, 2018. "Decision making for sustainable urban energy planning: an integrated evaluation framework of alternative solutions for a NZED (Net Zero-Energy District) in Turin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 803-817.
    13. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2010. "Handling multicriteria preferences in cluster analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 819-827, May.
    14. Cheng Peng & Xunbo Wu & Yelin Fu & Kin Keung Lai, 2017. "Alternative approaches to constructing composite indicators: an application to construct a Sustainable Energy Index for APEC economies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 747-759, October.
    15. Pawel Lezanski & Maria Pilacinska, 2018. "The dominance-based rough set approach to cylindrical plunge grinding process diagnosis," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 989-1004, June.
    16. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    17. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    18. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    19. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    20. Bouyssou, Denis & Pirlot, Marc, 2009. "An axiomatic analysis of concordance-discordance relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 468-477, December.
    21. Azam, Nouman & Zhang, Yan & Yao, JingTao, 2017. "Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 704-714.

    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:15:p:6067-:d:391152. 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.