IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v106y2017icp427-439.html

An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran

Author

Listed:
  • Nassereddine, M.
  • Eskandari, H.

Abstract

Public transportation is one of the most important systems in transportation, especially in big and crowded cities. As a result, evaluation of public transportation systems is a strategic decision-making problem for both private and public sections. In this paper, the problem of public transportation passengers in Tehran is addressed and their satisfaction levels are assessed by using passenger satisfaction survey. An integrated MCDM approach is proposed for evaluation of public transportation systems based on Delphi method, group analytic hierarchy process (GAHP) and preference ranking organization method for enrichment of evaluations (PROMETHEE). The proposed model provides more reliable and realistic results and introduces directions for future improvements of public transportation service quality. A sensitivity analysis is applied to investigate the influence of criteria weights on the decision making problem. As a conclusion, the most important public transportation systems in Tehran orderly are: metro, taxi, BRT, bus and van. Therefore, Tehran Municipality and policy makers should encourage and support the previously mentioned systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Nassereddine, M. & Eskandari, H., 2017. "An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 427-439.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:427-439
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856417303439
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.013?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans, 1994. "PROMCALC & GAIA: a new decision support system for multicriteria decision aid," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9349, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Hassan, Mohammad Nurul & Hawas, Yaser E. & Ahmed, Kamran, 2013. "A multi-dimensional framework for evaluating the transit service performance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 47-61.
    3. A. Awasthi & H. Omrani, 2009. "A hybrid approach based on AHP and belief theory for evaluating sustainable transportation solutions," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(3), pages 212-226.
    4. Holmgren, Johan, 2013. "The efficiency of public transport operations – An evaluation using stochastic frontier analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 50-57.
    5. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    6. Nathanail, Eftihia, 2008. "Measuring the quality of service for passengers on the hellenic railways," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 48-66, January.
    7. Celik, Erkan & Bilisik, Ozge Nalan & Erdogan, Melike & Gumus, Alev Taskin & Baracli, Hayri, 2013. "An integrated novel interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method to improve customer satisfaction in public transportation for Istanbul," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 28-51.
    8. Mouwen, Arnoud, 2015. "Drivers of customer satisfaction with public transport services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-20.
    9. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    10. van Lierop, Dea & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2016. "Enjoying loyalty: The relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in public transit," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 50-59.
    11. Mouwen, Arnoud & Rietveld, Piet, 2013. "Does competitive tendering improve customer satisfaction with public transport? A case study for the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 29-45.
    12. Jian-qiang Wang & Zhi-qiu Han & Hong-yu Zhang, 2014. "Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Method Based on Intuitionistic Interval Fuzzy Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 715-733, July.
    13. Yedla, Sudhakar & Shrestha, Ram M., 2003. "Multi-criteria approach for the selection of alternative options for environmentally sustainable transport system in Delhi," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 717-729, October.
    14. Tyrinopoulos, Yannis & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2008. "Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 260-272, July.
    15. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    16. Aydin, Nezir & Celik, Erkan & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2015. "A hierarchical customer satisfaction framework for evaluating rail transit systems of Istanbul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-81.
    17. Behrens, Christiaan & Pels, Eric, 2012. "Intermodal competition in the London–Paris passenger market: High-Speed Rail and air transport," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 278-288.
    18. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    19. Kabir, Golam & Sumi, Razia Sultana, 2014. "Power substation location selection using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and PROMETHEE: A case study from Bangladesh," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 717-730.
    20. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lin, Cheng-Wei & Opricovic, Serafim, 2005. "Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1373-1383, July.
    21. Yong Xie & Hongwei Wang, 2014. "A Group Cooperative Decision Support System Based on Extended Contract Net," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 1191-1217, September.
    22. Lai, Wen-Tai & Chen, Ching-Fu, 2011. "Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers--The roles of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 318-325, March.
    23. Stelzer, Anselmo & Englert, Frank & Hörold, Stephan & Mayas, Cindy, 2016. "Improving service quality in public transportation systems using automated customer feedback," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 259-271.
    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. Aydin, Nezir, 2017. "A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 87-98.
    2. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    3. Aydin, Nezir & Celik, Erkan & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2015. "A hierarchical customer satisfaction framework for evaluating rail transit systems of Istanbul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-81.
    4. Amirali Soltanpour & Mahmoud Mesbah & Meeghat Habibian, 2020. "Customer satisfaction in urban rail: a study on transferability of structural equation models," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 123-146, March.
    5. Zhang, Chunqin & Juan, Zhicai & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2016. "Do the organizational forms affect passenger satisfaction? Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 129-148.
    6. Rong, Rui & Liu, Lishan & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng, 2022. "Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger’s perception and satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 80-100.
    7. Benedetto Barabino & Nicola Aldo Cabras & Claudio Conversano & Alessandro Olivo, 2020. "An Integrated Approach to Select Key Quality Indicators in Transit Services," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 1045-1080, June.
    8. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    9. Mustafa Hamurcu & Tamer Eren, 2020. "Strategic Planning Based on Sustainability for Urban Transportation: An Application to Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-24, April.
    10. Yuning Wang & Zhe Zhang & Mengyuan Zhu & Hexian Wang, 2020. "The Impact of Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction on Reuse Intention in Urban Rail Transit in Tianjin, China," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440198, January.
    11. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    12. Gao, Sa & Ran, Qingsong & Su, Zicheng & Wang, Ling & Ma, Wanjing & Hao, Ruochen, 2024. "Evaluation system for urban traffic intelligence based on travel experiences: A sentiment analysis approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    13. Machado-León, José Luis & de Oña, Rocío & Baouni, Tahar & de Oña, Juan, 2017. "Railway transit services in Algiers: priority improvement actions based on users perceptions," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 175-185.
    14. Mandhani, Jyoti & Nayak, Jogendra Kumar & Parida, Manoranjan, 2020. "Interrelationships among service quality factors of Metro Rail Transit System: An integrated Bayesian networks and PLS-SEM approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 320-336.
    15. Roberto F. Abenoza & Oded Cats & Yusak O. Susilo, 2019. "How does travel satisfaction sum up? An exploratory analysis in decomposing the door-to-door experience for multimodal trips," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1615-1642, October.
    16. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Ettema, Dick F. & Susilo, Yusak O., 2018. "Do accessibility, vulnerability, opportunity, and travel characteristics have uniform impacts on the traveler’s experience?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PA), pages 38-51.
    17. Park, Keunhyun & Farb, Anna & Chen, Shuolei, 2021. "First-/last-mile experience matters: The influence of the built environment on satisfaction and loyalty among public transit riders," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 32-42.
    18. Lee, Deok-Joo, 2018. "A multi-criteria approach for prioritizing advanced public transport modes (APTM) considering urban types in Korea," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 148-161.
    19. Liou, James J.H. & Hsu, Chao-Che & Chen, Yun-Shen, 2014. "Improving transportation service quality based on information fusion," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 225-239.
    20. Tuan, Vu Anh & Van Truong, Nguyen & Tetsuo, Shimizu & An, Nguyen Ngoc, 2022. "Public transport service quality: Policy prioritization strategy in the importance-performance analysis and the three-factor theory frameworks," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 118-134.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:transa:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:427-439. 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/547/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.