Abstract
This paper proposes a methodology for evaluating transportation demand management (TDM) alternatives in the context of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). The proposed approach takes into account not only quantitative criteria (i.e. transportation and environmental impacts) but also qualitative criteria (i.e. social impacts) which are intrinsically uncertain and subjective. The transportation impacts of the TDM alternatives are estimated by TRIPS1 program, while the MOBILE5a2 is employed in order to estimate environmental impacts in terms of NOX, CO and Hydrocarbon. The social impacts of the TDM alternatives are estimated by interviewing relevant experts. Consequently, the uncertain subjective judgements were quantified by the evidential reasoning (ER) approach based on decision theory and Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence. In order to measure the weights of criteria, analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is adopted. As a last step, the CODASID3 method based on a complete concordance and discordance analysis is used to rank alternative TDM schemes. The proposed approach is demonstrated by ranking 14 TDM alternatives, which are chosen for the central business area in Bangkok, Thailand of 22-square-kilometers.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 603-626 |
Number of pages | 24 |
Journal | Transportation |
Volume | 32 |
Issue number | 6 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 2005 |
Keywords
- Multi-criteria decision making
- Subjectivity
- Transportation demand management
- Uncertainty