Data Envelopment Analysis for the Selection of Highway–Rail Grade Separation Projects
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 149, Issue 6
Abstract
With the ambitious goal of zero deaths but growing traffic and congestion at highway–rail grade crossings (HRGCs), grade separation of these conflicting points has become an increasing strategy that improves railway safety but also increases network capacity and enhances livability attributes. Meanwhile, the engineering costs of grade separation are expensive and can vary considerably, which results in difficulties in the rational selection of such projects. This paper implemented the data envelopment analysis (DEA) for the benchmarking of high-risk HRGCs for grade separation considerations in Oklahoma. The top 1% of HRGCs were identified based on the New Hampshire Hazard Index (NHI) rankings and used as the decision-making units (DMUs) for DEA. The outputs of the DEA process included safety benefits, travel time savings, vehicle operating cost savings, and environmental benefits, and the input was the estimated cost of a grade separation project. The DEA efficiency scores of the DMUs were calculated, and nine HRGCs were identified on the frontiers with efficiency scores of 1.0. To further discriminate the DEA-efficient HRGCs, the enhanced DEA (E-DEA), which combines self-evaluation and cross-evaluation methods, was performed and the most efficient crossing was decreased to four with the E-DEA scores of 1.0. This study established a hierarchical framework combining the NHI, DEA, and E-DEA approaches, available data sets, and decision-making tools for the selection of the most efficient investment alternatives for highway–rail grade separation.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, tools, or models that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The data used herein were collected under the SP&R 2400 research project, “Screening Tools for Considering Grade Separation of Rail-Highway Crossings in Oklahoma,” sponsored by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT).
References
Adler, N., L. Friedman, and Z. Sinuany-Stern. 2002. “Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 140 (2): 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00068-1.
Agarwal, P. K., P. K. Patil, and R. Mehar. 2013. “A methodology for ranking road safety hazardous locations using an analytical hierarchy process.” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci. 104 (Dec): 1030–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.198.
Alvanchi, A., M. Rahimi, and H. Alikhani. 2019. “Air pollution concentration near sensitive urban locations: A missing factor to consider in the grade separation projects.” J. Cleaner Prod. 228 (Aug): 824–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.300.
Angiz, M. Z., A. Mustafa, and M. J. Kamali. 2013. “Cross-ranking of decision making units in data envelopment analysis.” Appl. Math. Modell. 37 (1–2): 398–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2012.02.038.
Banker, R. D., A. Charnes, and W. W. Cooper. 1984. “Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis.” Manage. Sci. 30 (9): 1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078.
Belenky, P. 2011. Revised departmental guidance on the valuation of travel time in economic analysis. Washington, DC: USDOT.
Berndt, M., R. F. Benekohal, J. Mathew, J. Beckett, J. McKerrow, T. Worker-Braddock, A. Cathcart, and N. Weander. 2019. Prioritization procedure for proposed road–rail grade separation projects along specific rail corridors. Washington, DC: National Cooperative Highway Research Program.
Caltrans. 2020. “Proposition 1B—Highway-railroad crossing safety.” Accessed October 6, 2021. https://bondaccountability.dot.ca.gov/ProjectListPreAction.do?page=1000026.
Castro-Nuño, M., and M. T. Arévalo-Quijada. 2018. “Assessing urban road safety through multidimensional indexes: Application of multicriteria decision making analysis to rank the Spanish provinces.” Transp. Policy 68 (Sep): 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.04.017.
Chandra, S., M. Rahmani, T. Thai, V. Mishra, and J. Camacho. 2021. Evaluating financing mechanisms and economic benefits to fund grade separation projects. San José, CA: Mineta Transportation Institute Publications.
Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes. 1978. “Measuring the efficiency of decision making units.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2 (6): 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8.
Cook, W. D., and L. M. Seiford. 2009. “Data envelopment analysis (DEA)—Thirty years on.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 192 (1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.01.032.
Cooper, W. W., L. M. Seiford, and J. Zhu. 2011. Handbook on data envelopment analysis. New York: Springer.
Crawford, R. 2010. “Prioritising level crossings in Melbourne for grade separation.” In Proc., CORE 2010, Conf. on Railway Engineering. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Road Research Board.
Das, S., X. Kong, S. M. Lavrenz, L. Wu, and M. Jalayer. 2022. “Fatal crashes at highway rail grade crossings: A US based study.” Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 11 (1): 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.03.002.
Doyle, J., and R. Green. 1994. “Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses.” J. Oper. Res. Soc. 45 (5): 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.1994.84.
Fancello, G., M. Carta, and P. Serra. 2020. “Data envelopment analysis for the assessment of road safety in urban road networks: A comparative study using CCR and BCC models.” Case Stud. Transp. Policy 8 (3): 736–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.07.007.
Federal Railroad Administration. n.d. “Crossing inventory and accident reports.” Accessed October 25, 2021. https://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/PublicSite/Crossing/Crossing.aspx.
Federal Railroad Administration. 2014. “GradeDec.Net reference manual.” Accessed July 20, 2020. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/14852/GradeDec%20Reference%20Manual.pdf.
Galán-Martín, Á., G. Guillén-Gosálbez, L. Stamford, and A. Azapagic. 2016. “Enhanced data envelopment analysis for sustainability assessment: A novel methodology and application to electricity technologies.” Comput. Chem. Eng. 90 (Jul): 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.04.022.
Gitelman, V., A. S. Hakkert, E. Doveh, and A. Cohen. 2006. “Screening tools for considering grade separation at rail-highway crossings.” J. Transp. Eng. 132 (1): 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2006)132:1(52).
Green, R. H., J. R. Doyle, and W. D. Cook. 1996. “Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 90 (3): 461–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00039-9.
Hellman, A., and T. Ngamdung. 2010. Low-cost warning device industry assessment. Washington, DC: USDOT.
Hermans, E., F. Van den Bossche, and G. Wets. 2009. “Uncertainty assessment of the road safety index.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (7): 1220–1228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.09.004.
Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., G. R. Jahanshahloo, M. Khodabakhshi, M. Rostamy-Malkhlifeh, Z. Moghaddas, and M. Vaez-Ghasemi. 2013. “A review of ranking models in data envelopment analysis.” J. Appl. Math. 2013 (Jul): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/492421.
Jie, W., L. Liang, and Y.-C. Zha. 2008. “Determination of the weights of ultimate cross efficiency based on the solution of nucleolus in cooperative game.” Syst. Eng. Theory Pract. 28 (5): 92–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1874-8651(09)60023-5.
Kern Council of Governments. 2011. Grade separation prioritization report. Kern County, CA: Kern Council of Governments.
Lee, D., J. Warner, and C. Morgan. 2019. Discovering crash severity factors of grade crossing with a machine learning approach.” In Proc., ASME/IEEE Joint Rail Conf. Snowbird, UT: Rail Transportation Division.
Li, J. Q., and S. McNeil. 2021. “Data envelopment analysis for highway asset investment assessment.” J. Traffic Transp. Eng. (English Ed.) 8 (1): 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2019.06.001.
Li, Q., D. Xiao, S. McNeil, and K. Wang. 2011. “Benchmarking sustainable mechanistic-empirical based pavement design alternatives using data envelopment analysis (DEA).” In Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Managing Pavement Assets. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council.
Nardo, M., M. Saisana, A. Saltelli, S. Tarantola, H. Hoffman, and E. Giovannini. 2005. Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
ODOT (Oklahoma DOT). 2018. “Oklahoma state rail plan.” Accessed July 25, 2021. https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/odot/documents/OK_StateRailPlan_Final_2018.pdf.
Ogden, B. D., and C. Cooper. 2019. Highway-rail crossing handbook. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
Qiu, Z., and X. Peng. 2015. “Investigating the impact of urban grade-separation on pedestrian PM2. 5 exposure.” Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 17 (7): 1917–1927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0909-x.
Raub, R. A. 2009. “Examination of highway–rail grade crossing collisions nationally from 1998 to 2007.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2122 (1): 63–71. https://doi.org/10.3141/2122-08.
Russell, E. R. 1981. “New perspectives on closure of railroad-highway grade crossings as a system improvement.” Transp. Res. Rec. 802: 80–85.
Schrader, M. H., and J. R. Hoffpauer. 2001. “Methodology for evaluating highway-railway grade separations.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1754 (1): 77–80. https://doi.org/10.3141/1754-09.
Sexton, T. R., R. H. Silkman, and A. J. Hogan. 1986. “Data envelopment analysis: Critique and extensions.” New Directions Program Eval. 1986 (32): 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1441.
Sposato, S., P. Biem-Aime, and M. Chaudhary. 2006. Public education and enforcement research study. Washington, DC: USDOT, Federal Railroad Administration.
Taggart, R. C., P. Lauria, G. Groat, C. Rees, and A. Brick-Turin. 1987. Evaluating grade-separated rail and highway crossing alternatives. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Trottenberg, P., and R. Rivkin. 2013. Guidance on treatment of the economic value of a statistical life in US Department of Transportation analyses. Washington, DC: USDOT.
Tustin, B., H. Richards, H. McGee, and R. Patterson. 1986. Railroad-highway grade crossing handbook. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
Washio, S., and S. Yamada. 2013. “Evaluation method based on ranking in data envelopment analysis.” Expert Syst. Appl. 40 (1): 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.015.
Wu, J., L. Liang, F. Yang, and H. Yan. 2009. “Bargaining game model in the evaluation of decision making units.” Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (3): 4357–4362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.05.001.
Wu, J., J. Sun, and L. Liang. 2012. “Cross-efficiency evaluation method based on weight-balanced data envelopment analysis model.” Comput. Ind. Eng. 63 (2): 513–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2012.04.017.
Yang, X., J. Q. Li, W. Liu, K. C. Wang, J. Hatt, and J. Schwennesen. 2022. Selection of at-grade highway-rail crossings for grade separation.” Int. J. Rail Transp 1 (2): 227–247.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 149 • Issue 6 • June 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Sep 6, 2022
Accepted: Feb 3, 2023
Published online: Mar 29, 2023
Published in print: Jun 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Aug 29, 2023
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.