IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v66y2018icp30-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis

Author

Listed:
  • te Boveldt, Geert
  • Van Raemdonck, Koen
  • Macharis, Cathy

Abstract

Interjurisdictional infrastructure planning is a complex affair due to the multiplicity of actors representing the jurisdictions, sometimes at several institutional levels. Their priorities are likely to conflict, as the ratio between costs and benefits of infrastructure differs according to place and to scale. Yet, for evaluating strategic decisions, policy makers typically use methods that assess impacts from a single-actor viewpoint, providing little insight in the political feasibility and desirability of projects that cross institutional borders.

Suggested Citation

  • te Boveldt, Geert & Van Raemdonck, Koen & Macharis, Cathy, 2018. "A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 30-39.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:30-39
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X17300562
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.03.002?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. Khraibani, R. & de Palma, A. & Picard, N. & Kaysi, I., 2016. "A new evaluation and decision making framework investigating the elimination-by-aspects model in the context of transportation projects' investment choices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 67-81.
    2. Hans de Bruijn & Martijn Leijten, 2008. "Mega-Projects and Contested Information," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bent Flyvbjerg & Bert van Wee (ed.), Decision-Making on Mega-Projects, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Bogetoft, Peter, 1992. "A note on conflict resolution and truthtelling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 109-116, July.
    4. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2008. "Public Planning of Mega-Projects: Overestimation of Demand and Underestimation of Costs," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bent Flyvbjerg & Bert van Wee (ed.), Decision-Making on Mega-Projects, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. De Brucker, Klaas & Macharis, Cathy & Verbeke, Alain, 2013. "Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 122-131.
    6. 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.
    7. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    8. Short, Jack & Kopp, Andreas, 2005. "Transport infrastructure: Investment and planning. Policy and research aspects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 360-367, July.
    9. Bert van Wee & Lóránt A. Tavasszy, 2008. "Ex-ante Evaluation of Mega-Projects: Methodological Issues and Cost–Benefit Analysis," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bent Flyvbjerg & Bert van Wee (ed.), Decision-Making on Mega-Projects, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Roy, Bernard, 1993. "Decision science or decision-aid science?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 184-203, April.
    11. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    12. Taylor, Brian D. & Schweitzer, Lisa, 2005. "Assessing the experience of mandated collaborative inter-jurisdictional transport planning in the United States," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 500-511, November.
    13. Hugo Priemus & Bent Flyvbjerg & Bert van Wee (ed.), 2008. "Decision-Making on Mega-Projects," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4112.
    14. Miller, Roger & Lessard, Donald, 2007. "Evolving Strategy: Risk Management and the Shaping of Large Engineering Projects," Working papers 37157, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    15. R.C. Van den Honert, 2001. "Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 275-286, May.
    16. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    17. Roy, B. & Present, M. & Silhol, D., 1986. "A programming method for determining which Paris metro stations should be renovated," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 318-334, February.
    18. Robert T. Eckenrode, 1965. "Weighting Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 180-192, November.
    19. Gino Baudry & Cathy Macharis & Thomas Vallée, 2014. "A range based Multi-Actor Multicriteria Analysis to incorporate uncertainty in stakeholder based evaluation processes," Working Papers hal-01010513, HAL.
    20. Vickerman, Roger, 2008. "Provision of public transport under conflicting regulatory regimes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1176-1182, November.
    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. Kębłowski, Wojciech & Dobruszkes, Frédéric & Boussauw, Kobe, 2022. "Moving past sustainable transport studies: Towards a critical perspective on urban transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 74-83.
    2. te Boveldt, Geert & Keseru, Imre & Macharis, Cathy, 2022. "When monetarisation and ranking are not appropriate. A novel stakeholder-based appraisal method," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 192-205.
    3. Cavallaro, Federico & Dianin, Alberto, 2019. "Cross-border commuting in Central Europe: features, trends and policies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 86-104.
    4. Pamucar, Dragan & Macura, Dragana & Tavana, Madjid & Božanić, Darko & Knežević, Nikola, 2022. "An integrated rough group multicriteria decision-making model for the ex-ante prioritization of infrastructure projects: The Serbian Railways case," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Ben Derudder & Jorn Koelemaij, 2023. "City Diplomacy Research at the Crossroads," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 114(3), pages 177-180, July.

    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. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 257-269.
    2. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    3. María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-jiménez, 2007. "Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 287-301, July.
    4. Sasaki, Yasuo, 2023. "Strategic manipulation in group decisions with pairwise comparisons: A game theoretical perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(3), pages 1133-1139.
    5. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    6. Josephine Gatti Schafer & Caleb T Gallemore, 2016. "Biases in multicriteria decision analysis: The case of environmental planning in Southern Nevada," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1652-1675, December.
    7. Marta Bottero & Elena Comino & Federico Dell’Anna & Laura Dominici & Maurizio Rosso, 2019. "Strategic Assessment and Economic Evaluation: The Case Study of Yanzhou Island (China)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Miller, Michael & Szimba, Eckhard, 2015. "How to avoid unrealistic appraisal results? A concept to reflect the occurrence of risk in the appraisal of transport infrastructure projects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 65-75.
    9. Bert van Wee & Jan Anne Annema & Hugo Priemus, 2013. "Model building for infrastructure initiatives," Chapters, in: Peter Karl Kresl & Jaime Sobrino (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Urban Economies, chapter 17, pages 423-441, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Salling, Kim Bang & Leleur, Steen, 2011. "Transport appraisal and Monte Carlo simulation by use of the CBA-DK model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 236-245, January.
    11. Wang, Wei & Liu, Wenbin & Mingers, John, 2015. "A systemic method for organisational stakeholder identification and analysis using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 562-574.
    12. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "A peer-to-peer dynamic adaptive consensus reaching model for the group AHP decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 521-530.
    13. Hugo Priemus & Marian Bosch-Rekveldt & Mendel Giezen, 2013. "Dealing with the complexity, uncertainties and risk of megaprojects: redundancy, resilience and adaptivity," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 5, pages 83-110, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    15. Rothengatter, Werner, 2019. "Megaprojects in transportation networks," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-15.
    16. Bert van Wee & Piet Rietveld, 2013. "CBA: ex ante evaluation of mega-projects," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 12, pages 269-290, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. R.C. Van den Honert, 2001. "Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 275-286, May.
    18. JosÉ MarÍa & Moreno JimÉnez & Juan AguarÓn Joven & AgustÍn Raluy Pirla & Alberto TurÓn Lanuza, 2005. "A Spreadsheet Module for Consistent Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 89-108, March.
    19. Milan Ranđelović & Jelena Stanković & Kristijan Kuk & Gordana Savić & Dragan Ranđelović, 2018. "An Approach to Determining the Importance of Model Criteria in Certifying a City as Business-Friendly," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 156-165, April.
    20. Dimitriou, Harry T. & Ward, E. John & Dean, Marco, 2016. "Presenting the case for the application of multi-criteria analysis to mega transport infrastructure project appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 7-20.

    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:66:y:2018:i:c:p:30-39. 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.