Methodology for the Determination of Relative Weights of Highway Asset Management System Goals and of Performance Measures
Publication: Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 15, Issue 2
Abstract
Of the overall benefits of a highway project, only a portion may be quantifiable in dollar values and the remaining in nondollar values. To facilitate project comparisons, both portions of project benefits need to be converted into commensurable values. Such conversion can be achieved by using multicriteria value functions that can be derived through weighting, scaling, and amalgamation. This paper introduces a methodology that applies the analytical hierarchy process to analyze survey data collected using the Delphi method to derive optimal weights of highway system goals and of performance measures needed in the weighting step. The writers further illustrate the impact of using the derived optimal weights over average weights assigned by survey respondents for estimating project benefits on project selection results in a case study. Significant differences are revealed in project selection results based on the two sets of weights. This provides evidence that highway project evaluation using the average weights could unduly skew the estimation of project benefits and, therefore, could yield biased decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers are grateful to the Joint Transportation Research Program at Purdue University and the Indiana DOT for financial support of the study. The writers are, however, responsible for the study results. This paper does not necessarily reflect the views of the project sponsor.
References
Barron, F. H., and Barret, B. E. (1996). “Decision quality using ranked attribute weights.” Manage. Sci., 42(11), 1515–1523.
Dalkey, N. C., and Helmer, O. (1963). “An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts.” Manage. Sci., 9(3), 458–467.
Dodgson, J., Spackman, M., Pearman, A., and Phillips, L. (2001). Multicriteria analysis: A manual, Dept. for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London.
Fioretti, G. (2001). “A mathematical theory of evidence for G. L. S. Shackle.” Mind and Society 2(1), 77–98.
Hammond, K. R., Mumpower, J. L., and Smith, T. H. (1977). “Linking environmental models with models of human judgment-symmetrical decision aid.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 7(5), 358–367.
Hobbs, B., and Meier, P. (2000). Energy decision and the environment: A guide to the user of multicriteria methods, Kluwer, Boston.
Keeney, R. L., and Nair, K. (1977). “Nuclear sitting using decision analysis.” Energy Policy, 5(3), 223–231.
Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H. (1993). Decision with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs, Wiley, New York.
Keeney, R. L., and Sicherman, A. (1983). “Illustrative comparison of one utility’s coal and nuclear choices.” Oper. Res., 31(1), 50–83.
Keeney, R. L., and von Winterfeldt, D. (1987). “Optimal procedures to evaluation decisions with multiple objectives.” EPRI EA-5433, Electronic Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif.
Li, Z., and Sinha, K. C. (2003). “Multicriteria highway programming incorporating risk and uncertainty: A methodology for highway asset management systems.” Rep. No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2003/21, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, Ind.
Li, Z., and Sinha, K. C. (2004). “A methodology for multicriteria decision making in highway asset management.” Transportation Research Record. 1885, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 79–87.
Littlechild, S. C. (2001). “Buchanan and Shackle on cost, choice and subjective economics.” Method and morals in constitutional economics: Essays in honor of James M. Buchanan, G. Brennan, H. Kliemt, and R. D. Tollison, eds., Springer, Berlin, Germany, 78–97.
Martello, S., and Toth, P. (1990). Knapsack problems: Algorithms and computer implementations, Wiley, Chichester, U.K.
Saaty, T. L. (1977). “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures.” J. Math. Psychol., 15, 234–281.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation, McGraw-Hill, Hightstown, N.J.
Shackle, G. L. S. (1949). Expectation in economics, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Shackle, G. L. S. (1961). Decision, order and time in human affairs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Shackle, G. L. S. (1970). Expectation, enterprise and profit: The theory of the firm, Allen and Unwin, London.
Shackle, G. L. S. (1972). Epistemics and economics: A critique of economic doctrines, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Shepard, R. (1964). “On subjectively optimal selections among multiattribute alternatives.” Human judgments and optimality, M. Shelley and G. Bryan, eds., Wiley, New York, 257–281.
Stillwell, W. G., von Winterfeldt, D., and John, R. S. (1987). “Comparing hierarchical and nonhierarchical weighting methods for eliciting multiattribute value models.” Manage. Sci., 33(4), 442–450.
von Winterfeldt, D., and Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Young, R. A. (2001). Uncertainty and the environment: Implications for decision making and environmental policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, U.K.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 15 • Issue 2 • June 2009
Pages: 95 - 105
Copyright
© 2009 ASCE.
History
Received: Nov 3, 2005
Accepted: Sep 2, 2008
Published online: May 15, 2009
Published in print: Jun 2009
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.