IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2018i1p9-d191961.html

Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model

Author

Listed:
  • Omid Ghorbanzadeh

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

  • Sarbast Moslem

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3., 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Thomas Blaschke

    (Department of Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria)

  • Szabolcs Duleba

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Műegyetem rkp. 3., 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Sustainable urban transport requires smart and environmentally-friendly technical solutions. It also needs to meet the demands of different user groups, including current and potential future users, in order to avoid opposition of the citizens and to support sustainable development decisions. While these requirements are well-known, conducting full surveys of user needs and preferences are tedious and costly, and the interests of different user groups may be contradictory. We therefore developed a methodology based on the prevalent Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which is capable of dealing with the inconsistencies and uncertainties of users’ responses by applying an Interval Analytic Hierarchy Process (IAHP) through comparing the results of passengers to reference stakeholder groups. For a case study in Mersin, a coastal city in southern Turkey with 1.7 Million inhabitants, three groups were surveyed with questionnaires: 40 users of the public transport system, 40 non-users, and 17 experts. Based on interval pairwise comparison matrices, consisting of whole judgments of all groups, the IAHP methodology could attain a consensual preference ranking for a future public transportation system between the three groups. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the factor ranking was very stable.

Suggested Citation

  • Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Sarbast Moslem & Thomas Blaschke & Szabolcs Duleba, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:9-:d:191961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/9/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/9/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Redman, Lauren & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy & Hartig, Terry, 2013. "Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 119-127.
    2. 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.
    3. Arthur Lehner & Christoph Erlacher & Matthias Schlögl & Jacob Wegerer & Thomas Blaschke & Klaus Steinnocher, 2018. "Can ISO-Defined Urban Sustainability Indicators Be Derived from Remote Sensing: An Expert Weighting Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-31, April.
    4. Shanshan Fu & Xinping Yan & Di Zhang & Minyang Zhang, 2018. "Risk influencing factors analysis of Arctic maritime transportation systems: a Chinese perspective," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 439-455, May.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2006. "Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-33987-0, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Thomas L. Saaty, 2006. "The Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process, chapter 0, pages 1-26, Springer.
    8. Entani, Tomoe & Sugihara, Kazutomi, 2012. "Uncertainty index based interval assignment by Interval AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 379-385.
    9. Dea van Lierop & Madhav G. Badami & Ahmed M. El-Geneidy, 2018. "What influences satisfaction and loyalty in public transport? A review of the literature," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 52-72, January.
    10. Hrelja, Robert, 2015. "Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-13.
    11. 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.
    12. Giuseppe Ioppolo & Stefano Cucurachi & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Saija & Lei Shi, 2016. "Sustainable Local Development and Environmental Governance: A Strategic Planning Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, February.
    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. Lo, Huai-Wei & Fang, Tzu-Yi & Lin, Sheng-Wei, 2024. "Integrating technological and strategic analysis: Evaluating the key determinants of transportation sustainability in taipei Mass Rapid Transit using the Rough-Fermatean DEMATEL approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Swati Goyal & Shivi Agarwal & Narinderjit Singh Sawaran Singh & Trilok Mathur & Nirbhay Mathur, 2022. "Analysis of Hybrid MCDM Methods for the Performance Assessment and Ranking Public Transport Sector: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-21, November.
    3. Xiaohong Jiang & Huiying Wang & Xiucheng Guo & Xiaolin Gong, 2019. "Using the FAHP, ISM, and MICMAC Approaches to Study the Sustainability Influencing Factors of the Last Mile Delivery of Rural E-Commerce Logistics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Yakup Çelikbilek & Sarbast Moslem, 2023. "A grey multi criteria decision making application for analyzing the essential reasons of recurrent lane change," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 916-941, June.
    5. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & Juan Palaguachi & Martin Ortega & Tiziana Campisi & Vincenza Torrisi, 2021. "An Integrated Multi Criteria Decision Making Model for Evaluating Park-and-Ride Facility Location Issue: A Case Study for Cuenca City in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-16, July.
    6. Collins Opoku Antwi & Jun Ren & Wenyu Zhang & Wilberforce Owusu-Ansah & Michael Osei Aboagye & Emmanuel Affum-Osei & Richard Adu Agyapong, 2022. "“I Am Here to Fly, but Better Get the Environment Right!” Passenger Response to Airport Servicescape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-24, August.
    7. Eric Tamatey Lawer & Johannes Herbeck & Michael Flitner, 2019. "Selective Adoption: How Port Authorities in Europe and West Africa Engage with the Globalizing ‘Green Port’ Idea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Alejandro Sánchez-Atondo & Leonel García & Julio Calderón-Ramírez & José Manuel Gutiérrez-Moreno & Alejandro Mungaray-Moctezuma, 2020. "Understanding Public Transport Ridership in Developing Countries to Promote Sustainable Urban Mobility: A Case Study of Mexicali, Mexico," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Dariusz Tłoczyński & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Sebastian Susmarski, 2022. "Analysis of Sustainable Transport Systems in Service of Selected SEA-EU Consortium Countries’ Airports—A Pilot Case Study of Passenger Choices for Gdańsk Airport," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Ahmad Alkharabsheh & Sarbast Moslem & Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2021. "An Integrated Approach of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Grey Theory for Evaluating Urban Public Transportation Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    12. Xi Lu & Jiaqing Lu & Xinzheng Yang & Xumei Chen, 2022. "Assessment of Urban Mobility via a Pressure-State-Response (PSR) Model with the IVIF-AHP and FCE Methods: A Case Study of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, March.
    13. Elena García-Jiménez & Sara Poveda-Reyes & Gemma Dolores Molero & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia & Andrea Gorrini & Yvonne Hail & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Filomena Mauriello, 2020. "Methodology for Gender Analysis in Transport: Factors with Influence in Women’s Inclusion as Professionals and Users of Transport Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-32, May.
    14. Sarbast Moslem & Tiziana Campisi & Agnieszka Szmelter-Jarosz & Szabolcs Duleba & Kh Md Nahiduzzaman & Giovanni Tesoriere, 2020. "Best–Worst Method for Modelling Mobility Choice after COVID-19: Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Mateusz Hämmerling & Joanna Kocięcka & Stanisław Zaborowski, 2021. "AHP as a Useful Tool in the Assessment of the Technical Condition of Hydrotechnical Constructions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-26, January.
    17. Bin Liu & Huajian Fang & Xiaosheng Qin & Feilian Zhang & Jingjing Li, 2023. "An integrated multi‐criteria analysis framework of built reservoir with dam‐heightening‐based decision: China's largest water transfer programs for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 540-554, February.
    18. Hadi Jahanshahi & Zahra Alijani & Sanda Florentina Mihalache, 2023. "Towards Sustainable Transportation: A Review of Fuzzy Decision Systems and Supply Chain Serviceability," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    19. Kamber, Eren & Yücel, Buse & Gümüş, Mehmet, 2026. "A review on multi-criteria decision-making in passenger transportation: Trends, methods, and future directions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).

    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. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Antonella Longo & Antonio Ficarella, 2022. "The Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM) to Support Risk-Based Decisions in a Case-Study of Critical Infrastructure Digitization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Xu-Hui Li & Lin Huang & Qiang Li & Hu-Chen Liu, 2020. "Passenger Satisfaction Evaluation of Public Transportation Using Pythagorean Fuzzy MULTIMOORA Method under Large Group Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Asil Oztekin & Joseph Ekong & Ali Dag, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of hospitals: a fully-ranking DEA–FAHP approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 278(1), pages 361-378, July.
    4. Afsaneh Afzali & Soheil Sabri & M. Rashid & Jamal Mohammad Vali Samani & Ahmad Ludin, 2014. "Inter-Municipal Landfill Site Selection Using Analytic Network Process," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(8), pages 2179-2194, June.
    5. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    6. Reza Azimi & Abdolreza Yazdani-Chamzini & Mohammad Majid Fouladgar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Mohammad Hossein Basiri, 2011. "Ranking the strategies of mining sector through anp and topsis in a swot framework," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 670-689, September.
    7. Daniel Toth & Jaroslava Janků & Adéla Marie Marhoul & Josef Kozák & Mansoor Maitah & Jan Jehlička & Lukáš Řeháček & Richard Přikryl & Tomáš Herza & Jan Vopravil & David Kincl & Tomáš Khel, 2023. "Soil quality assessment using SAS (Soil Assessment System)," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15.
    8. Fuat Sekmen & Isa Demirkol & Haşmet Gökırmak, 2024. "Evaluation of urban transportation preferences with analytical hierarchy process method," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 2087-2101, June.
    9. Oryani, Bahareh & Koo, Yoonmo & Rezania, Shahabaldin & Shafiee, Afsaneh, 2021. "Barriers to renewable energy technologies penetration: Perspective in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 971-983.
    10. Ravi Kumar Gedela & K. Krishna Mohan & V. Kamakshi Prasad, 2018. "Application of BOCR models in service oriented architecture (SOA): study on model validation through quantification for QoS considerations," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 9(6), pages 1346-1354, December.
    11. Jing-Wei Liu & Che-Wei Chang & Yao-Ji Wang & Yi-Hui Liu, 2022. "Constructing a Decision Model for Health Club Members to Purchase Coaching Programs during the COVID-19 Epidemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-13, October.
    12. Nilsson, Jonas & Jansson, Johan & Nicholas, Kimberly & Zhao, Chunli, 2025. "Traveler perceived service quality and satisfaction with public transport: The influence of digital competence and environmental attitudes," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    13. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Kazim Topuz & Ali Dag & Asil Oztekin, 2019. "An AHP-IFT Integrated Model for Performance Evaluation of E-Commerce Web Sites," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1345-1355, December.
    14. Starr, Morgan & Joshi, Omkar & Will, Rodney E. & Zou, Chris B., 2019. "Perceptions regarding active management of the Cross-timbers forest resources of Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas: A SWOT-ANP analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 523-530.
    15. J. Hummel & John Bridges & Maarten IJzerman, 2014. "Group Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Benefit-Risk Assessment: A Tutorial," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 129-140, June.
    16. Haneen Abuzaid & Mahmoud Awad & Abdulrahim Shamayleh, 2024. "Photovoltaic Modules’ Cleaning Method Selection for the MENA Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Thomas Saaty & Luis Vargas, 2012. "The possibility of group choice: pairwise comparisons and merging functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 481-496, March.
    18. Seyhan Sipahi Author_Email: sipahi@istanbul.edu.tr & Erdal Tekarslan & Aysegul Karaeminogullari, 2011. "Multicriteria Approach For Prioritizing Objectives In A Strategic Plan: A Case Study From Higher Education," 2nd International Conference on Business and Economic Research (2nd ICBER 2011) Proceeding 2011-165, Conference Master Resources.
    19. Carpitella, Silvia & Mzougui, Ilyas & Benítez, Julio & Carpitella, Fortunato & Certa, Antonella & Izquierdo, Joaquín & La Cascia, Marco, 2021. "A risk evaluation framework for the best maintenance strategy: The case of a marine salt manufacture firm," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    20. Pawel Tadeusz Kazibudzki, 2023. "The uncertainty related to the inexactitude of prioritization based on consistent pairwise comparisons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-30, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:9-:d:191961. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.