Incorporating Uncertainty into Transportation Decision Making

Abstract

Incorporating uncertainty into transportation decision making has become a more important activity as evidenced by the popularity of scenario-based approaches in the regional transportation planning process. Particularly in decision making to promote sustainability, uncertainty and risk factors can be important elements because they can influence which alternative is perceived as the most desirable depending on a wide range of parameters. The objective of the study is to demonstrate how some of these uncertainties can be incorporated when a multiple-criteria decision-making method is used to choose the most desirable among competing alternatives. Using data from the Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan region, this paper examines the sensitivity of the relative desirability of competing transportation and land use plans to changes in regional priorities and weights for sustainability parameters. Throughout the study, sensitivity analysis is used as a tool to incorporate the variability in criteria weights and concurrent variation in the sustainability evaluation results and final decision. These exercises could help decision makers determine how changing the emphasis on different regional priorities could most effectively result in desired regional outcomes.

A review of multi-criteria assessment of the social sustainability of infrastructures

“…Health involves the effects on the human being's physical and mental state due to accidental causes (Li et al 2012, Resendez et al 2014, long-term diseases Haupt 2007, Chow et al 2014) or exposure to sources of pollution (Jeon 2010, Yadollahi et al 2015. Community capital approach: 4 Public opinion includes the perception of the community with respect to the general acceptance of the project, unease or satisfaction with the construction or the operation of the infrastructure (Dasgupta and Edwin 2005, Gilmour et al 2011, Zavadskas et al 2015.…”

“…In the direct allocation methods, the evaluator identifies a direct score that represents the importance of each criterion (Shen et al 2011, Koo et al 2009, Balali et al 2014). In the order relation methods, the evaluator organizes the criteria by order of importance, through which weights are obtained (Jeon 2010, Ramani et al 2011, Chen et al 2014. Some contributions consider more than one method for weight determination.…”

“…In the first case, equity is considered a cross-sectional mechanism to the structure of assessment model and intervenes in each indicator and result (Bonsall andKelly 2005, Thomopoulos et al 2009). In the second case, equity is a part of the assessment system in which specific indicators are compensated with others without guaranteeing the equity of the system (Jeon 2010, Shaiu et al 2015.…”

Is Additive Utility Function Always a Sufficient Method in the Project Prioritization Process? Bridge Management Perspective

“…According to Jeon ( 7 ), uncertainty and risk factors are emphasized in the decision-making process for sustainability. An Atlanta and Georgia metropolitan region dataset is used to perform the sensitivity analysis for variation in criteria weights and sustainability evaluation results.…”

“…An Atlanta and Georgia metropolitan region dataset is used to perform the sensitivity analysis for variation in criteria weights and sustainability evaluation results. After the sensitivity analysis, it is shown that regional priorities or weights play a critical role in deciding on the preferred plan alternative, which may be superior only from the standpoint of what is considered important in that region ( 7 ).…”