IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v36y2009i4p573-587.html

A Comparative Location Study for the Joint Development Station of a Mass Rapid Transit System: A Case in Taichung City in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Wann-Ming Wey

    (Department of Real Estate and Built Environment, National Taipei University, 67, Section 3, Ming-Shen East Road, Taipei 104, Taiwan)

  • Yu-Hern Chang

    (Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, 1 University Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan)

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the selection of a candidate joint development station (JDS) for a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system. We propose a method to reach consensus for a group decision on the basis of a combination of the analytic hierarchy process and the assurance region model of data envelopment analysis. Several strategies for using this methodology—for example, Delphi procedures—are also discussed. On the basis of these analyses, the evaluators (council members) responsible for recommending the proper candidate JDS for an MRT system in Taichung City, Taiwan, came up with two contenders from among five: one station in Taichung's CBD area and the other in the Situn district. It was not possible to discriminate between the two using multiple criteria for evaluating stations. The evaluators recommended these two stations to the city council, who should now be able to make an informed, objective decision. In this report we have summarized, with emphasis on the methodological aspects, the decision-making processes that the evaluators followed.

Suggested Citation

  • Wann-Ming Wey & Yu-Hern Chang, 2009. "A Comparative Location Study for the Joint Development Station of a Mass Rapid Transit System: A Case in Taichung City in Taiwan," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(4), pages 573-587, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:36:y:2009:i:4:p:573-587
    DOI: 10.1068/b33135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b33135
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/b33135?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Russell G. Thompson & F. D. Singleton & Robert M. Thrall & Barton A. Smith, 1986. "Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating a High-Energy Physics Lab in Texas," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 35-49, December.
    2. Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 1997. "Scaling units via the canonical correlation analysis in the DEA context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 629-637, August.
    3. Stewart, TJ, 1994. "Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision making: A response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 205-206, March.
    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. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    2. C Kao & H-T Hung, 2005. "Data envelopment analysis with common weights: the compromise solution approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(10), pages 1196-1203, October.
    3. Adler, Nicole & Yazhemsky, Ekaterina, 2010. "Improving discrimination in data envelopment analysis: PCA-DEA or variable reduction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 273-284, April.
    4. Wey, Wann-Ming & Peng, Ti-Ching, 2025. "Smart growth principles and airport-centered TOD: A framework for sustainable site selection," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Tofallis, C., 1996. "Improving discernment in DEA using profiling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 361-364, June.
    6. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    7. C Serrano Cinca & C Mar Molinero, 2004. "Selecting DEA specifications and ranking units via PCA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(5), pages 521-528, May.
    8. Harald Dyckhoff & Katrin Allen, 1999. "Theoretische Begründung einer Effizienzanalyse mittels Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 411-436, May.
    9. Kaoru Tone, 2001. "On Returns to Scale under Weight Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 31-47, July.
    10. Conde, Eduardo, 2002. "Mean utility in the assurance region model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 93-103, July.
    11. Chia-Lee Yang & Benjamin J. C. Yuan & Chi-Yo Huang, 2015. "Key Determinant Derivations for Information Technology Disaster Recovery Site Selection by the Multi-Criterion Decision Making Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-40, May.
    12. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2020. "Using a Choquet integral-based approach for incorporating decision-maker’s preference judgments in a Data Envelopment Analysis model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1016-1030.
    13. Robert Huggins & Hiro Izushi, 2009. "Regional Benchmarking in a Global Context: Knowledge, Competitiveness, and Economic Development," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 23(4), pages 275-293, November.
    14. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2001. "Slack-adjusted DEA for time series analysis: Performance measurement of Japanese electric power generation industry in 1984-1993," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 232-259, January.
    15. Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro & Javier Salinas-Jimenez & Peter Smith, 1997. "On the Role of Weight Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 215-230, May.
    16. Lovell, Knox, 2001. "Future Research Opportunities in Efficiency and Productivity Analysis," Efficiency Series Papers 2001/01, University of Oviedo, Department of Economics, Oviedo Efficiency Group (OEG).
    17. 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.
    18. Wettemann, Patrick Johannes Christopher & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2017. "An efficiency-based concept to assess potential cost and greenhouse gas savings on German dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 27-37.
    19. Premachandra, I. M., 2001. "A note on DEA vs principal component analysis: An improvement to Joe Zhu's approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(3), pages 553-560, August.
    20. Mikuláš Luptáčik & Eduard Nežinský, 2020. "Measuring income inequalities beyond the Gini coefficient," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 561-578, June.

    More about this item

    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:sae:envirb:v:36:y:2009:i:4:p:573-587. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.