IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v15y2008i4p225-231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A qualitative model for road investment appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Cundric, A.
  • Kern, T.
  • Rajkovic, V.

Abstract

Recent research in transport appraisal has been predominantly performed by using quantitative linear additive methods such as AHP and MAUT. This paper presents a qualitative model for road investment appraisal based on the DEX method. Qualitative modelling and ability to handle inaccurate and/or incomplete data about options make the DEX method particularly well suited for decision problems involving qualitative concepts and a great deal of expert judgement as is the case in the field of transport. Introduced is a novel and practical way of road appraisal based on the road appraisal framework aimed to support transport policy development in Slovenia.

Suggested Citation

  • Cundric, A. & Kern, T. & Rajkovic, V., 2008. "A qualitative model for road investment appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 225-231, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:15:y:2008:i:4:p:225-231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(08)00030-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Smal, Kenneth A., 1998. "Project Evaluation," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3ff1w6pr, University of California Transportation Center.
    2. Tsamboulas, Dimitrios A., 2007. "A tool for prioritizing multinational transport infrastructure investments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 11-26, January.
    3. Vickerman, R., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies for transport projects in the United Kingdom," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 7-16, January.
    4. Morisugi, H., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 35-40, January.
    5. Sayers, T. M. & Jessop, A. T. & Hills, P. J., 2003. "Multi-criteria evaluation of transport options--flexible, transparent and user-friendly?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 95-105, April.
    6. Rothengatter, W., 2000. "Evaluation of infrastructure investments in Germany," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 17-25, January.
    7. Lee, D. B., 2000. "Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 41-50, January.
    8. Quinet, E., 2000. "Evaluation methodologies of transportation projects in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 27-34, January.
    9. Peter Nijkamp & Barry Ubbels & Erik Verhoef, 2002. "Transport Investment Appraisal and the Environment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-104/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    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. 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. Gardziejczyk, Wladyslaw & Zabicki, Piotr, 2014. "The influence of the scenario and assessment method on the choice of road alignment variants," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 294-305.
    3. Maria Morfoulaki & Jason Papathanasiou, 2021. "Use of the Sustainable Mobility Efficiency Index (SMEI) for Enhancing the Sustainable Urban Mobility in Greek Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Maria Morfoulaki & Jason Papathanasiou, 2021. "Use of PROMETHEE MCDA Method for Ranking Alternative Measures of Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, March.
    5. Štěpán Veselý & Mirko Dohnal, 2013. "Selection of scenarios in qualitative models: The case of a government tenders model," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 61(7), pages 2923-2929.

    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. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2013. "Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 241-255.
    2. Hayashi, Y. & Morisugi, H., 2000. "International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 73-88, January.
    3. Junn-Yuan Teng & Wen-Chih Huang & Maw-Cherng Lin, 2010. "Systematic budget allocation for transportation construction projects: a case in Taiwan," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 331-361, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Shi, Jing & Zhou, Nian, 2012. "A quantitative transportation project investment evaluation approach with both equity and efficiency aspects," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 93-100.
    6. Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Roumboutsos, Athena, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of decision making during construction on transport project outcome," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 369-380, November.
    7. 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.
    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. Nahmias–Biran, Bat-hen & Shiftan, Yoram, 2016. "Towards a more equitable distribution of resources: Using activity-based models and subjective well-being measures in transport project evaluation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 672-684.
    10. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams & Laura O. Petrov & Harutyun Shahumyan & Hedwig Van Delden, 2017. "Developing and Assessing Alternative Land-Use Scenarios from the MOLAND Model: A Scenario-Based Impact Analysis Approach for the Evaluation of Rapid Rail Provisions and Urban Development in the Greate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    11. Xu, Wangtu & Lin, Weihua, 2016. "Selecting the public transit projects with PCA-DP technique: The example of Xiamen City," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 56-71.
    12. Gardziejczyk, Wladyslaw & Zabicki, Piotr, 2014. "The influence of the scenario and assessment method on the choice of road alignment variants," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 294-305.
    13. Barfod, Michael Bruhn & Salling, Kim Bang, 2015. "A new composite decision support framework for strategic and sustainable transport appraisals," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1-15.
    14. Guirao, Begoña & Campa, Juan Luis, 2015. "The effects of tourism on HSR: Spanish empirical evidence derived from a multi-criteria corridor selection methodology," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 37-46.
    15. Lowry, Michael B., 2010. "Using optimization to program projects in the era of communicative rationality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 94-101, March.
    16. Metz, David, 2021. "Economic benefits of road widening: Discrepancy between outturn and forecast," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 312-319.
    17. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    18. Nir Sharav & Yoram Shiftan, 2021. "Optimal Urban Transit Investment Model and Its Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-29, August.
    19. Mouter, Niek & Annema, Jan Anne & Wee, Bert van, 2013. "Attitudes towards the role of Cost–Benefit Analysis in the decision-making process for spatial-infrastructure projects: A Dutch case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-14.
    20. Olsson, Jerry, 2009. "Improved road accessibility and indirect development effects: evidence from rural Philippines," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 476-483.

    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:eee:trapol:v:15:y:2008:i:4:p:225-231. 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.