An Integrated Decision Support Model for Evaluating Public Transport Quality

Sarbast Moslem · Ahmad Alkharabsheh · Karzan Ismael · Szabolcs Duleba

52 citations0/0 files storedApplied Sciences

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Multi-Criteria Decision Making Transportation Planning and Optimization Urban Transport Systems Analysis

Abstract

Big cities suffer from serious complex problems such as air pollution, congestion, and traffic accidents. Developing public transport quality in such cities is considered an efficient remedy to obviate these critical issues. This paper aims to determine the significant supply quality criteria of public transportation. As a methodology, a hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) combined with the Best Worst Method (BWM) is applied. The proposed model is basically a hierarchy structure with at least a 5 × 5 pairwise comparison matrix or larger. A real-world complex problem was examined to validate the created model (public transport quality improvement). An urban bus transport system in the Jordanian capital city, Amman, was used as a case study; three stakeholder groups (passengers, nonpassengers, and representatives of the local government) participated in the evaluation process. The conventional Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) leads to weak consistency in the case of existing 5 × 5 pairwise comparison matrices or larger, particularly in estimating complex problems. To avoid this critical issue in AHP, we used Best Worst Method (BWM) comparisons, which make the evaluation process easier for decision makers; moreover, it saves survey time and provides more consistency when compared to AHP pairwise comparisons. The model adopted highlighted the most significant service quality criteria that influence urban bus transport systems. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis conducted detected the stability of the criteria ranking in the three levels of the hierarchical structure. Since the proposed AHP–BWM model (which is the sole example of this sort of combination) is independent from the decision attributes, it can be applied to arbitrary hierarchically structured decision problems with a relatively large number of pairwise comparisons.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

References

1977A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures 1990How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process 2014Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method 2015Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model 2007Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study 2018Review of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction 2015Passenger satisfaction evaluation model for Urban rail transit: A structural equation modeling based on partial least squares 2007An application of AHP and sensitivity analysis for selecting the best slicing machine

Cited by

2023Combining Kano’s Model, IPA, and FMEA to Evaluate Service Quality Risk for Bus Service: Case of Bangkok Bus Service 2024Empowering Urban Public Transport Planning Process for Medium-Sized Cities in Developing Countries: Innovative Decision Support Framework for Sustainability 2024Evaluation of Public Transportation System through Social Network Analysis Approach 2022Integrated Framework for Bus Timetabling and Scheduling in Multi-Line Operation Mode

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.