A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management

Kabir, Golam; Sadiq, Rehan; Tesfamariam, Solomon

doi:10.1080/15732479.2013.795978

Cited by 327 publications

(204 citation statements)

References 287 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

196

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are several studies where this approach has been applied in the field of transport (Cheng & Li, 2005;Friesz, Tourreilles, Han, & Fernandez, 1980;Frohwein, Lambert, Haimes, & Schiff, 1999;Giuliano, 1985;Iniestra & Gutiérrez, 2009;Khorramshahgol & Steiner, 1988). An extensive review of the MCDA method can be found in Huang, Keisler, and Linkov (2011), Kabir, Sadiq, and Tesfamariam (2013), Wang, Jing, Zhang, and Zhao (2009).…”

Section: Assessing Sustainability Of Transport Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attempts to integrate sustainability in the decision-making process for transport infrastructure projects continue to gain momentum. A number of tools and methodological frameworks are available -such as rating systems, traditional decision-making techniques, checklists, and different evaluation frameworks and models. While these tools are highly valuable, some practical issues remain unsolved. There is also a need for more standardized tools to appraise the sustainability of transport projects. This paper is a presentation of a review on the current assessment tools of sustainability applied to transport infrastructure projects. The preliminary part of the paper is an explanatory and comparative analysis of the tools and methods in terms of their effectiveness to appraise sustainability. The analysis is a critical evaluation of the current state of the art to identify the limitations of existing approaches, point out new areas of research, and propose a sustainability appraisal agenda for the future.

show abstract

Section: Assessing Sustainability Of Transport Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The evolution of MCDM in 1975-2015 was discussed in a number of review articles: Wiecek et al (2008), Zavadskas et al (2008Zavadskas et al ( , 2014, Kapliński (2009aKapliński ( , 2009b, Zavadskas, Turskis (2011), Liou, Tzeng (2012, Tamošaitienė, Kapliński (2013), Liou (2013), Gay, Sinha (2013), Kaplinski et al (2014aKaplinski et al ( , 2014b, Kabir et al (2013), Masri (2014), Mardani et al (2015aMardani et al ( , 2015bMardani et al ( , 2015c.…”

Section: The Development Of Mcdm Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Civil Engineering: Part I – A State-of-the-Art Survey

Zavadskas

Antuchevičienė

Kapliński

2016

Engineering Structures and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conflicting criteria are typical in evaluating options: cost or price is usually one of the main criteria, and some measure of quality (performance level) is typically another criterion, usually in conflict with the cost. MCDM is used to identify and quantify decision-maker and stakeholder considerations about various (mostly) non-monetary factors, in order to compare alternative courses of action (Kabir et al, 2014). Alternatively, the multiple performance criteria can be combined into a so-called utility function, in which all the criteria are brought into a single scale.…”

Section: Multi-criteria Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-criteria decision making: AHP method applied for network bridge prioritization

Bukhsh¹,

Stipanović²,

Klanker

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the Joint COST TU1402 - COST TU1406 - IABSE WC1 Workshop: The Value of Structural Health Monitoring for the Reli

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In bridge management systems, multi-objective decision-making has emerged as a decision support technique to integrate various technical information and stakeholder values. Different multicriteria decision making techniques and tools have been developed in the last three decades. This paper presents an overview of different approaches to multi-objective decision making at the object and network level, with the purpose of incorporating different aspects of bridge performance goals, which may vary according to technical, environmental, economic and social factors. The example of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP), as one of the multi criteria decision making method, to a illustrative case study is presented in the paper.

show abstract

A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management

Cited by 327 publications

References 287 publications

Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods

Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods

Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Civil Engineering: Part I – A State-of-the-Art Survey

Multi-criteria decision making: AHP method applied for network bridge prioritization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About