IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6948-d578626.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Policies of Railway Operators Using SWOT Criteria and the SIMUS Method: A Case for the Bulgarian Railway Network

Author

Listed:
  • Svetla Stoilova

    (Faculty of Transport, Technical University of Sofia, 8 Kl. Ohridski Blvd., 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria)

  • Nolberto Munier

    (Institute for the Management and Innovation of Knowledge (INGENIO), Polytechnic University of Valencia, Camí de Vera, s/n, 46022 València, Spain)

Abstract

This study is useful for railway operators as it enables them to verify their decisions against the results of the application of the techniques of strategic planning and multi-criteria analysis. It gives railway stakeholders concise, objective and unbiased information so that they can then make decisions and also allows them to determine the strengths and sensitivity, of the best solution found. This paper presents a methodology for the assessment of the policies of railway operators using Strengths–Weakness–Opportunities–Threats (SWOT) criteria and the Sequential Interactive Modelling for Urban Systems (SIMUS) method. The methodology of the research consists of two stages. In the first stage, the alternatives of the policies for the railway operator are formulated; the criteria in the SWOT group are defined; and the values of the criteria are determined for each of the alternatives. In the second stage, the SIMUS method is applied to rank the alternatives and assess the criteria in the SWOT groups. The criteria are interpreted as objectives and linear optimizations are performed. A comparison between the desired values for each objective of the SWOT criteria and the optimum values of the objective functions obtained by SIMUS was made. The methodology was applied to the Bulgarian railway network. Three policies for railway operation were studied. The total number of 17 railway policies criteria in the SWOT group were defined and assessed—three strengths criteria, seven weaknesses criteria, three opportunities criteria and four threats criteria. The results indicated that the best strategy is A3 (some reconstruction of the railway infrastructure and new rolling stock on some lines), with the highest score of 3.76, followed by A2 (new rolling stock on some lines), with a score of 2.71. The status-quo strategy (A1) has a very low score of 0.43, that the current situation or status-quo cannot be supported. The weights of both strengths and opportunities are both of the same importance with a weight of 0.180. It was found out that the clusters Weakness and Threats are dominant with weights of 0.4 and 0.24 respectively. The results show that the weights are all practically the same, about 0.06, and therefore, no discrimination by importance is possible. The methodology makes it possible to consider the alternatives simultaneously, and in this way, the results will reflect the effect of one criterion on all others, and permit us to quantify the differences between expected and real results.

Suggested Citation

  • Svetla Stoilova & Nolberto Munier, 2021. "Analysis of Policies of Railway Operators Using SWOT Criteria and the SIMUS Method: A Case for the Bulgarian Railway Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6948-:d:578626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6948/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6948/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiaojia Wang & Chenggong Li & Jennifer Shang & Changhui Yang & Bingli Zhang & Xinsheng Ke, 2017. "Strategic Choices of China’s New Energy Vehicle Industry: An Analysis Based on ANP and SWOT," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-27, April.
    2. Nolberto Munier & Eloy Hontoria & Fernando Jiménez-Sáez, 2019. "Strategic Approach in Multi-Criteria Decision Making," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-030-02726-1, September.
    3. Irina MAKAROVA & Ksenia SHUBENKOVA & Larisa GABSALIKHOVA, 2017. "Analysis Of The City Transport System’S Development Strategy Design Principles With Account Of Risks And Specific Features Of Spatial Development," Transport Problems, Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Transport, vol. 12(1), pages 125-138, March.
    4. Terezie Bartuskova & Ales Kresta, 2015. "Application of AHP method in external strategic analysis of the selected organization," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 2204770, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    5. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Mukul, Esin & Kongar, Elif, 2021. "Health tourism strategy selection via SWOT analysis and integrated hesitant fuzzy linguistic AHP-MABAC approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Saman Hassanzadeh Amin & Ning Yan & Danielle Morris, 2018. "Analysis of Transportation Modes by Evaluating SWOT Factors and Pairwise Comparisons: A Case Study," Chapters, in: Valerio A. P. Salomon (ed.), Multi-Criteria Methods and Techniques Applied to Supply Chain Management, IntechOpen.
    7. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Georgios Apostolidis & Haris Doukas, 2020. "An AHP-SWOT-Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach for Achieving a Cross-Border RES Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-28, April.
    9. Kamile Petrauskiene & Jolanta Dvarioniene & Giedrius Kaveckis & Daina Kliaugaite & Julie Chenadec & Leonie Hehn & Berta Pérez & Claudio Bordi & Giorgio Scavino & Andrea Vignoli & Michael Erman, 2020. "Situation Analysis of Policies for Electric Mobility Development: Experience from Five European Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Anastasia Christodoulou & Kevin Cullinane, 2019. "Identifying the Main Opportunities and Challenges from the Implementation of a Port Energy Management System: A SWOT/PESTLE Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-15, October.
    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. Morteza Noruzi & Ali Naderan & Jabbar Ali Zakeri & Kamran Rahimov, 2023. "A Novel Decision-Making Framework to Evaluate Rail Transport Development Projects Considering Sustainability under Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Željko Stević & Dillip Kumar Das & Rade Tešić & Marijo Vidas & Dragan Vojinović, 2022. "Objective Criticism and Negative Conclusions on Using the Fuzzy SWARA Method in Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Chin-Tsai Lin & Cheng-Yu Chiang, 2022. "Development of Strategies for Taiwan’s Corrugated Box Precision Printing Machine Industry—An Implementation for SWOT and EDAS Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Changlu Zhang & Jian Zhang & Qiong Yang, 2022. "Identifying Critical Risk Factors in Green Product Certification Using Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Sabina Kordana-Obuch & Michał Wojtoń & Mariusz Starzec & Beata Piotrowska, 2023. "Opportunities and Challenges for Research on Heat Recovery from Wastewater: Bibliometric and Strategic Analyses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-36, September.

    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. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Havle, Celal Alpay & Feyzioğlu, Orhan, 2021. "An integrated SWOT based fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MARCOS methodology for digital transformation strategy analysis in airline industry," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Mercè Roca & Jaume Albertí & Alba Bala & Laura Batlle-Bayer & Joan Ribas-Tur & Pere Fullana-i-Palmer, 2021. "Sustainability in the Opera Sector: Main Drivers and Limitations to Improve the Environmental Performance of Scenography," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Janja Rudolf & Andrej Udovč, 2022. "Introducing the SWOT Scorecard Technique to Analyse Diversified AE Collective Schemes with a DEX Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Jun Geng & Yi Huang & Xiang Li & Yun Zhang, 2023. "Overcoming Barriers to the Adoption of Recycled Construction Materials: A Comprehensive PEST Analysis and Tailored Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Ana Bricia Galindo-Muro & Riccardo Cespi & Stephany Isabel Vallarta-Serrano, 2023. "Applications of Electric Vehicles in Instant Deliveries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Anastasia Christodoulou & Kevin Cullinane, 0. "Potential for, and drivers of, private voluntary initiatives for the decarbonisation of short sea shipping: evidence from a Swedish ferry line," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 0, pages 1-23.
    7. Chabi Simin Najib Dafia & Fei Chen & Peter Davis Sumo, 2022. "Guideline and Strategies of Textile Industry on the Sustainable Development of Benin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    8. Ivana Marinovic Matovic, 2020. "PESTEL Analysis of External Environment as a Success Factor of Startup Business," ConScienS Conference Proceedings 015im, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    9. Shengyuan Wang, 2022. "Exploring the Sustainability of China’s New Energy Vehicle Development: Fresh Evidence from Population Symbiosis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-21, August.
    10. Marina Siebenhofer & Amela Ajanovic & Reinhard Haas, 2021. "How Policies Affect the Dissemination of Electric Passenger Cars Worldwide," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, April.
    11. Claudiu Vasile Kifor & Niculina Alexandra Grigore, 2023. "Circular Economy Approaches for Electrical and Conventional Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-28, April.
    12. Anastasia Christodoulou & Kevin Cullinane, 2021. "Potential for, and drivers of, private voluntary initiatives for the decarbonisation of short sea shipping: evidence from a Swedish ferry line," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 23(4), pages 632-654, December.
    13. Maria José Casañ & Marc Alier & Ariadna Llorens, 2021. "A Collaborative Learning Activity to Analyze the Sustainability of an Innovation Using PESTLE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    14. Busu Mihail & Stamule Stere, 2020. "An ANP approach to estimate the market shares of the car industry companies in Romania," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 953-962, July.
    15. Ferretti, V., 2021. "Framing territorial regeneration decisions: Purpose, perspective and scope," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Mladen Krstić & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Snežana Tadić & Milovan Kovač & Pier Paolo Miglietta, 2023. "A Novel Axial-Distance-Based Aggregated Measurement (ADAM) Method for the Evaluation of Agri-Food Circular-Economy-Based Business Models," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Corrado Zoppi, 2018. "Integration of Conservation Measures Concerning Natura 2000 Sites into Marine Protected Areas Regulations: A Study Related to Sardinia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, September.
    19. Nunzia Capobianco & Vincenzo Basile & Francesca Loia & Roberto Vona, 2021. "Toward a Sustainable Decommissioning of Offshore Platforms in the Oil and Gas Industry: A PESTLE Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    20. Siripha Junlakarn & Phimsupha Kokchang & Kulyos Audomvongseree, 2022. "Drivers and Challenges of Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading Development in Thailand," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-25, February.

    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:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6948-:d:578626. 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 (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.