IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v129y2019icp52-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bikeway prioritization to increase bicycle network connectivity and bicycle-transit connection: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach

Author

Listed:
  • Zuo, Ting
  • Wei, Heng

Abstract

Due to limited resources such as budget and land space, it remains challenging to identify key prior corridors on which investments on bikeways (e.g., traditional and protected bike lanes) are most valuable to increasing low-stress bike network connectivity and bicycle-transit connection. In built-up urban areas, it’s usually difficult to find the extra space for building bikeways, and vehicle delays could be worse off if there is no road widening. Facing these challenges, the paper introduces a systematic planning analytics aiming to increase bicycle connectivity and bicycle-transit connection with minimized impacts on motor vehicles and cost. The stakeholders concerned include bicyclists, transit users, motor vehicle drivers, and investors. To reduce conflict potentials due to multiple factors involved in decision making choices between stakeholders, a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) technique is applied to compare alternatives based on a set of performance evaluation criteria. Performance criteria include bicycling connectivity between origins and destinations, bike share connectivity to destinations, bicycle-transit service coverage population, bike share connectivity to transit, automobile traffic delay, and capital costs. Criteria weights are determined by pair-wise comparisons in which the conflicts between stakeholders and trade-offs among criteria are considered in a quantity-based method. A final preference score calculated in the sum of the weighted and normalized performance measurements is used to rank alternatives. The approach is applied through a case study in the Uptown Cincinnati, Ohio to determine the priorities of the proposed new bikeways in the area. The results indicate that the protected bike lanes exhibit a more significant advantage over bike lanes in terms of the benefits for bicyclists and transit users. At the same time, however, higher construction cost and countermeasures to reduce the potential of consequent traffic congestion need to be need carefully considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Zuo, Ting & Wei, Heng, 2019. "Bikeway prioritization to increase bicycle network connectivity and bicycle-transit connection: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 52-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:52-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.08.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585641831156X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2019.08.003?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. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    2. Broach, Joseph & Dill, Jennifer & Gliebe, John, 2012. "Where do cyclists ride? A route choice model developed with revealed preference GPS data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1730-1740.
    3. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    4. Meghan Winters & Michael Brauer & Eleanor M Setton & Kay Teschke, 2013. "Mapping Bikeability: A Spatial Tool to Support Sustainable Travel," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(5), pages 865-883, October.
    5. Lootsma, F. A., 1989. "Conflict resolution via pairwise comparison of concessions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 109-116, May.
    6. Jen-Jia Lin & Chia-Jung Yu, 2013. "A bikeway network design model for urban areas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 45-68, January.
    7. Ahmed El-Geneidy & Michael Grimsrud & Rania Wasfi & Paul Tétreault & Julien Surprenant-Legault, 2014. "New evidence on walking distances to transit stops: identifying redundancies and gaps using variable service areas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 193-210, January.
    8. Macharis, C. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Possible bias in multi-actor multi-criteria transportation evaluation: Issues and solutions," Serie Research Memoranda 0031, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    9. Wafic El-Assi & Mohamed Salah Mahmoud & Khandker Nurul Habib, 2017. "Effects of built environment and weather on bike sharing demand: a station level analysis of commercial bike sharing in Toronto," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 589-613, May.
    10. John Parkin & Mark Wardman & Matthew Page, 2008. "Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 93-109, January.
    11. Cathy Macharis & Peter Nijkamp, 2013. "Stakeholder bias in multi-actor multi-criteria transportation evaluation: issues and solutions," Chapters, in: Thomas Vanoutrive & Ann Verhetsel (ed.), Smart Transport Networks, chapter 12, pages 248-268, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Lowry, Michael B. & Furth, Peter & Hadden-Loh, Tracy, 2016. "Prioritizing new bicycle facilities to improve low-stress network connectivity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 124-140.
    15. Zuo, Ting & Wei, Heng & Rohne, Andrew, 2018. "Determining transit service coverage by non-motorized accessibility to transit: Case study of applying GPS data in Cincinnati metropolitan area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 1-11.
    16. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    17. Alan T. Murray & Rex Davis, 2001. "Equity in Regional Service Provision," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 557-600, November.
    18. Elvira Haezendonck, 2008. "Transport Project Evaluation: Extending the Social Cost Benefit Approach," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 10(3), pages 322-324, September.
    19. Meghan Winters & Gavin Davidson & Diana Kao & Kay Teschke, 2011. "Motivators and deterrents of bicycling: comparing influences on decisions to ride," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 153-168, January.
    20. A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1959. "Chance-Constrained Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 73-79, October.
    21. Wang, Haizhong & Palm, Matthew & Chen, Chen & Vogt, Rachel & Wang, Yiyi, 2016. "Does bicycle network level of traffic stress (LTS) explain bicycle travel behavior? Mixed results from an Oregon case study," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 8-18.
    22. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    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. Xin Li & Yongsheng Qian & Junwei Zeng & Xuting Wei & Xiaoping Guang, 2022. "Measurement of Street Network Structure in Strip Cities: A Case Study of Lanzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Grzegorz Ginda & Marta Szyba, 2023. "Identification of Key Factors for the Development of Agricultural Biogas Plants in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Shilpa Dogra & Nicholas O’Rourke & Michael Jenkins & Daniel Hoornweg, 2021. "Integrated Urban Mobility for Our Health and the Climate: Recommended Approaches from an Interdisciplinary Consortium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-12, November.
    4. Papaix, Claire & Eranova, Mariya & Zhou, Li, 2023. "Shared mobility research: Looking through a paradox lens," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 156-167.
    5. Qiyao Yang & Jun Cai & Tao Feng & Zhengying Liu & Harry Timmermans, 2021. "Bikeway Provision and Bicycle Commuting: City-Level Empirical Findings from the US," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Tufail Ahmed & Ali Pirdavani & Davy Janssens & Geert Wets, 2023. "Utilizing Intelligent Portable Bicycle Lights to Assess Urban Bicycle Infrastructure Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, March.
    7. Ospina, Juan P. & Duque, Juan C. & Botero-Fernández, Verónica & Montoya, Alejandro, 2022. "The maximal covering bicycle network design problem," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 222-236.

    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. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    2. Anowar, Sabreena & Eluru, Naveen & Hatzopoulou, Marianne, 2017. "Quantifying the value of a clean ride: How far would you bicycle to avoid exposure to traffic-related air pollution?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 66-78.
    3. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.
    4. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    5. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Huang, Xianjin & Fu, Guole & Chen, Jia-Tsong & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "Evaluating the sustainability of urban renewal projects based on a model of hybrid multiple-attribute decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Karatas, Mumtaz & Sulukan, Egemen & Karacan, Ilknur, 2018. "Assessment of Turkey's energy management performance via a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 890-912.
    7. Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand & Hossein Azadi & Dereje Teklemariam & Ehsan Houshyar & Philippe Maeyer & Frank Witlox, 2019. "Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 11-36, February.
    8. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin & Yue, Wen Long & Zou, Xin, 2019. "Multi-criteria analysis of policies for implementing clean energy vehicles in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 826-840.
    9. Muhammad Ikram & Qingyu Zhang & Robert Sroufe, 2020. "Developing integrated management systems using an AHP‐Fuzzy VIKOR approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2265-2283, September.
    10. Faghih Imani, Ahmadreza & Miller, Eric J. & Saxe, Shoshanna, 2019. "Cycle accessibility and level of traffic stress: A case study of Toronto," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    11. Felipe González & Carlos Melo-Riquelme & Louis Grange, 2016. "A combined destination and route choice model for a bicycle sharing system," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 407-423, May.
    12. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    13. Shao, Meng & Zhao, Yuanxu & Sun, Jinwei & Han, Zhixin & Shao, Zhuxiao, 2023. "A decision framework for tidal current power plant site selection based on GIS-MCDM: A case study in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(PB).
    14. Serhat KARAOGLAN & Serap SAHIN, 2018. "BIST XKMYA Isletmelerinin Finansal Performanslarinin Cok Kriterli Karar Verme Yontemleri Ile Olcumu ve Yontemlerin Karsilastirilmasi," Ege Academic Review, Ege University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 18(1), pages 63-80.
    15. Nastaran Chitsaz & Mohammad Banihabib, 2015. "Comparison of Different Multi Criteria Decision-Making Models in Prioritizing Flood Management Alternatives," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(8), pages 2503-2525, June.
    16. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica & Antomil-Ibias, José, 2014. "Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-17.
    17. Xiaobing Yu & Yiqun Lu & Mei Cai, 2018. "Evaluating agro-meteorological disaster of China based on differential evolution algorithm and VIKOR," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 94(2), pages 671-687, November.
    18. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    19. Bram Boettge & Damon M. Hall & Thomas Crawford, 2017. "Assessing the Bicycle Network in St. Louis: A PlaceBased User-Centered Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Teixeira, Inaian Pignatti & Rodrigues da Silva, Antônio Nélson & Schwanen, Tim & Manzato, Gustavo Garcia & Dörrzapf, Linda & Zeile, Peter & Dekoninck, Luc & Botteldooren, Dick, 2020. "Does cycling infrastructure reduce stress biomarkers in commuting cyclists? A comparison of five European cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    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:129:y:2019:i:c:p:52-71. 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.