An Approach to Prioritisation of Alternatives in Road Projects
Publication: International Conference on Transportation and Development 2021
ABSTRACT
Selection among alternatives is often a requirement in feasibility/planning stages of a road project. Prioritisation, using ranking tools, is then resorted to. While there are many multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods to carry out such prioritisation, compensatory methods for MCDA allow trade-offs between criteria, where a poor result in one criterion can be negated by a good result in another criterion. This provides a more realistic form of modeling than non-compensatory methods which include or exclude alternative solutions based on hard cutoffs. The weighted sum approach (WSA, a simple, but non-compensatory method) and technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS, a compensatory method), finds prominence in their application to prioritisation of alternatives in road projects. As the rankings often vary, it is often deemed necessary to find the rankings using a third alternative method. This paper explores the use of another compensatory method, but one that does not find much application in prioritization for road projects, the concordance-discordance analysis (CDA) and compares the ranking results obtained from different methods for a hypothetical case of route selection that decision makers face during the feasibility stage of a road-project preparation.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Annandale, D., and Lantzke, R. (2004). Report on the Process and Outcomes of the Multi-criteria Assessment of Planning Options for the Regional Road Network in the South West Corridor (with particular emphasis on Roe Highway Stage 7 & 8). School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia.
Bhandari, Sahadev B. (2014). “Multi-criteria Evaluation for Ranking Rural Road Projects: Case study of Nepal”. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684, p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11, Issue 6 Ver. I (Nov- Dec. 2014), pp 53-65.
Crown copyright. (2009). Multi-criteria analysis: a manual, Department for Communities and Local Government, London.
Effat, Hala A., and Hassan, Ossman A. (2013). “Designing and evaluation of three alternatives highway routes using the Analytical Hierarchy Process and the least-cost path analysis, application in Sinai Peninsula, Egypt”. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences 16, 141–151.
Greene, R., Devillers, R., Luther, J. E., and Eddy, B. G. (2011). “GIS-based multi-criteria analysis”. Geography Compass. 5/6 (6), doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00431.x: 412–432.
Haghighat, F. (2011). “Application of a Multi-criteria Approach to Road Safety Evaluation in the Bushehr Province, Iran”. Promet – Traffic&Transportation, Vol. 23, No. 5, 341-352.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/International Development Association. (2017). Prioritizing Climate Resilient Transport Investments in a Data-Scarce Environment, A Practitioners’ Guide.
Dvorsky, Jiri, Krejci, Petr, and Moldrık, Petr. (2006). “Software MCA8 for computation of MCA methods”. V'aclav Sn’aˇsel (Ed.): ELNET 2006, Paper 8, VˇSB – Technical University of Ostrava, FEECS, ISBN 80–248–1216–9., pp. 66–77.
Odoki, Jennaro B., Ahmed, F., Taylor, G., and Okello, Sunday A. (2008). Towards the Mainstreaming of an Approach to Include Social Benefits within Road Appraisal. Case Study - Uganda, the World Bank.
Pal, S., Maitra, B., and Sarkar, J. R. (2016). “An Approach for Prioritization of State Highways and Its Application.” Transp. in Dev. Econ. 2, 12 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-016-0017-6.
Podder, Subir K. (2018). “Benefit Distribution of Road Projects.” Indian Highways, Volume: 46, Number 3, ISSN 0376-2756, pp.23-29.
Roy, B. (1968) ‘Classement et choix en presence de points de vue multiples (la methode Electre)’, Revue Francaise de d’Informatique et de Recherche Operationnelle, 8, pp.57–75.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Transport Research Laboratory TRL. (2004). Overseas Road Note 22: A Guide to Pro-Poor Transport Appraisal, (The Inclusion of Social Benefits in road investment appraisal).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Jun 4, 2021
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.