IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v85y2023ics0038012122002397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Road safety performance rating through PSI-PRIDIT: A planning tool for designing policies and identifying best practices for EAS countries

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Faan
  • Li, Yaxin
  • Feng, Qianqian
  • Dong, Zehao
  • Qian, Yiming
  • Yan, Yi
  • Ho, Mun S.
  • Ma, Qianchen
  • Zhang, Dashan
  • Jin, Yuanzhe

Abstract

Road traffic injuries are a leading cause of socio-economic loss in East Asia Summit (EAS) countries. A regular performance rating to monitor progress and calibrate interventions is crucial for road safety improvement, helping to save human lives and reducing economic losses. To this end, we propose a new and easy-to-adapt multi-criteria decision-making method for systematically rating the road safety performance of the EAS countries, the preference selection index with principal component analysis of RIDIT scores (PSI-PRIDIT) (scores of a distribution relative to an identified distribution integral transformation). Using the results from other classical methods as a reference, we rank the EAS countries robustly and place them into three groups over the last decade (2009–2019), based on the composite road safety development index. Our findings should be useful for EAS countries to detect underlying problems and identify best practices, as well as provide government officials, policymakers, and practitioners with meaningful guidelines on the adoption of successful road safety measures. Overall, the proposed rating framework should help to strengthen the institutional capacity for road safety management and addresses road safety issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Faan & Li, Yaxin & Feng, Qianqian & Dong, Zehao & Qian, Yiming & Yan, Yi & Ho, Mun S. & Ma, Qianchen & Zhang, Dashan & Jin, Yuanzhe, 2023. "Road safety performance rating through PSI-PRIDIT: A planning tool for designing policies and identifying best practices for EAS countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:85:y:2023:i:c:s0038012122002397
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2022.101438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012122002397
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2022.101438?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. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    2. Ghazi, Amineh & Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, Farhad, 2019. "Assessment and budget allocation of Iranian natural gas distribution company- A CSW DEA based model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 112-118.
    3. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Bernard Roy, 2005. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 3-24, Springer.
    5. Fancello, Gianfranco & Carta, Michele & Fadda, Paolo, 2019. "Road intersections ranking for road safety improvement: Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 188-196.
    6. James Odeck & Abdulrahim Alkadi, 2001. "Evaluating efficiency in the Norwegian bus industry using data envelopment analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 211-232, August.
    7. Tuzkaya, Gülfem & Sennaroglu, Bahar & Kalender, Zeynep Tuğçe & Mutlu, Meltem, 2019. "Hospital service quality evaluation with IVIF-PROMETHEE and a case study," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. van Huylenbroeck, G., 1995. "The conflict analysis method: bridging the gap between ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and ORESTE," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 490-502, May.
    9. Avkiran, Necmi K. & Rowlands, Terry, 2008. "How to better identify the true managerial performance: State of the art using DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 317-324, April.
    10. Jing Ai & Patrick L. Brockett & Linda L. Golden & Montserrat Guillén, 2013. "A Robust Unsupervised Method for Fraud Rate Estimation," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 80(1), pages 121-143, March.
    11. Seker, Sukran & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2021. "Socio-economic evaluation model for sustainable solar PV panels using a novel integrated MCDM methodology: A case in Turkey," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    12. Chamoli, Sunil, 2015. "Preference selection index approach for optimization of V down perforated baffled roughened rectangular channel," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P2), pages 1418-1425.
    13. Badri Ahmadi, Hadi & Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Rezaei, Jafar, 2017. "Assessing the social sustainability of supply chains using Best Worst Method," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 99-106.
    14. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    15. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) for the Assessment of Renewable Energy Technologies in a Household: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zhang, Jingshun & Hu, Jiayi & Wang, Xitong & Fang, Lien & Jin, Yi & Li, Muyang & Liu, Yangqing & Wu, Anna & Wang, Libin & Liu, Ruining & Zhang, Yi & Chen, Faan, 2023. "Quantifying transport safety success at the regional level: A guide to policy and practice on investment for G20," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Peter Fernandes Wanke & Rebecca de Mattos, 2014. "Capacity Issues and Efficiency Drivers in Brazilian Bulk Terminals," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 11(5), pages 72-98, October.
    3. Chiou, Yu-Chiun & Lan, Lawrence W. & Yen, Barbara T.H., 2012. "Route-based data envelopment analysis models," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 415-425.
    4. Angela Stefania Bergantino & Enrico Musso, 2011. "A Multi-step Approach to Model the Relative Efficiency of European Ports: The Role of Regulation and Other Non-discretionary Factors," Chapters, in: Kevin Cullinane (ed.), International Handbook of Maritime Economics, chapter 18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Huang, Beijia & Zhang, Long & Ma, Linmao & Bai, Wuliyasu & Ren, Jingzheng, 2021. "Multi-criteria decision analysis of China’s energy security from 2008 to 2017 based on Fuzzy BWM-DEA-AR model and Malmquist Productivity Index," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    6. Konstantinos Petridis & Alexander Chatzigeorgiou & Emmanouil Stiakakis, 2016. "A spatiotemporal Data Envelopment Analysis (S-T DEA) approach: the need to assess evolving units," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 475-496, March.
    7. Lynn Mcalevey & Alexander Sibbald & David Tripe, 2010. "New Zealand Credit Union Mergers," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(3), pages 423-444, September.
    8. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    9. Shih-Heng Yu & Chia-Wei Hsu, 2020. "A unified extension of super-efficiency in additive data envelopment analysis with integer-valued inputs and outputs: an application to a municipal bus system," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(1), pages 515-535, April.
    10. Venkatesh, Anand & Kushwaha, Shivam, 2018. "Short and long-run cost efficiency in Indian public bus companies using Data Envelopment Analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 29-36.
    11. Aleksandar Aleksić & Danijela Tadić, 2023. "Industrial and Management Applications of Type-2 Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Techniques Extended with Type-2 Fuzzy Sets from 2013 to 2022," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    12. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    13. Milad Kolagar & Seyed Mohammad Hassan Hosseini & Ramin Felegari & Parviz Fattahi, 2020. "Policy-making for renewable energy sources in search of sustainable development: a hybrid DEA-FBWM approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 485-509, December.
    14. Negin Salimi & Jafar Rezaei, 2016. "Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1911-1938, December.
    15. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Wang, Derek D., 2019. "Performance-based resource allocation for higher education institutions in China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 66-75.
    17. Alda A. Henriques & Milton Fontes & Ana S. Camanho & Giovanna D’Inverno & Pedro Amorim & Jaime Gabriel Silva, 2022. "Performance evaluation of problematic samples: a robust nonparametric approach for wastewater treatment plants," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 193-220, August.
    18. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    19. Wang, Zhaohua & Li, Yi & Wang, Ke & Huang, Zhimin, 2017. "Environment-adjusted operational performance evaluation of solar photovoltaic power plants: A three stage efficiency analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1153-1162.
    20. Luiza Bădin & Cinzia Daraio & Léopold Simar, 2014. "Explaining inefficiency in nonparametric production models: the state of the art," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 214(1), pages 5-30, March.

    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:soceps:v:85:y:2023:i:c:s0038012122002397. 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/locate/seps .

    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.