A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis

Boveldt, Geert te; Raemdonck, Koen; Macharis, Cathy

doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.03.002

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Technical tools such as cost-benefit analysis have been criticised for their limited capacity to grasp the complexity and the very socio-political nature of environmental questions (Awasthi et al, 2018;Soria-Lara & Banister, 2018). In response, sustainable transport researchers have developed alternative analytical frameworks, such as multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (Macharis et al, 2009) and competence-based multi-criteria analysis (te Boveldt et al, 2018). These techniques are perhaps more transparent than their predecessors, can inspire much-needed reflection on the weight assigned to each criterion used in transport modelling, and have better capacity to exhibit tensions and conflicting views among diverse stakeholders and social groups.…”

Section: Journal Of Transport Geography and Transportation Research P...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving past sustainable transport studies: Towards a critical perspective on urban transport

Kȩbłowski

Dobruszkes

Boussauw

2022

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Journal Of Transport Geography and Transportation Research P...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving past sustainable transport studies: Towards a critical perspective on urban transport

Kȩbłowski

Dobruszkes

Boussauw

2022

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In this respect, the methods greatest strength is its greatest weakness. The method's capacity to flexibly integrate decision criteria chosen by stakeholders into the assessment process, whilst nominally allowing the factoring in of local community considerations (e.g., social or environmental issues) also leaves it susceptible to politically expedient decision-making (Te Boveldt, Van Raemdonck and Macharis, 2018;Dean, 2020). Moreover, achieving consensus on criteria when multiple stakeholders are involved is often problematic and can obstruct the assessment schedule.…”

Section: Multi-criteria Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, achieving consensus on criteria when multiple stakeholders are involved is often problematic and can obstruct the assessment schedule. Key project stakeholder bodies frequently have disparate objectives, which are often hard to reconcile in a mutually agreeable fashion, thus leading to an impasse in the criteria selection process (Te Boveldt, Van Raemdonck and Macharis, 2018). Additional criticism of the MCDM methodology's subjectivity is that it can lead to double counting of a project's impact (Annema, Mouter and Razaei, 2015;Chi and Bunker, 2020).…”

Section: Multi-criteria Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Transportation Infrastructure: A Case Study of Gold Coast Light Rail Stage 1&2

Langston

Crowley

2021

CEB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there has been increased reliance on new infrastructure projects to counter economic fallout and underpin employment security. Urban and inter-urban transportation projects, such as major road, rail and port facilities, are popular choices for national and state governments in Australia as they provide broad fiscal support across all sectors of the economy. The problem with stimulus is making sure that the quality of the new infrastructure provides collective utility to a community or region. Whether the benefits will be worthwhile and represent best use of resource inputs requires financial, social, ethical and environmental consequences to be evaluated in a comparable format. The aim in this paper is to analyse the Gold Coast Light Rail (GCLR) Stage 1&2 project using a method that is capable of merging tangible and intangible criteria using an ordinal ranking algorithm. While the GCLR case study is undertaken with the benefit of hindsight, normally these types of evaluations are performed in real time as a project progresses from initiation (design) to implementation (deliver) and influence (delight). The method adopted in this study represents a modern form of multi-criteria decision-making, which enables successful projects to be distinguished from unsuccessful ones using a time period from commencement until one full year of operation has occurred. The i3d3 model, developed by a team from Bond University, has the unique benefit of ranking projects from best to worst across an organisational portfolio, geographic region or industry sector. It also supports past project performance to inform new design through application of a continuous improvement process of recording lessons learned. The GCLR case study calculated 100% of the critical success factors in the model to be positive and produced an overall success ranking of 23 (on a scale of -100 to +100). This paper presents the approach taken to evaluate GCLR’s level of success and the calculations that took place to reach this finding. This is the first time i3d3 has been used on an Australian project.

show abstract

“…It provides a structure for applying MCDA in a multi-actor, multi-level context. Competence-based Multi Criteria Analysis (COMCA) was applied in a study with the aim to assess solutions for the main bottleneck of the railway network [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using multi-criteria analysis to select an energy source

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-criteria analysis is widely used to solve various technical and economic problems. There are a large number of applications of multi-criteria analysis. Methods for evaluating the total set of criteria have been investigated. However, the selection of criteria for various specific tasks remains the prerogative of specialists in the relevant branches. The goal of this study was to implement a multi-criteria analysis for assessing the potential of renewable energy sources' competitiveness. Renewable energy sources also include a closed nuclear fuel cycle based on fast-neutron reactors. The advantage of such cycle is the reproduction of nuclear fuel in the same or even greater quantity than it was used. At the same time, uranium isotopes are involved in the cycle, which are waste in conventional nuclear generation. The disadvantage of a nuclear fuel cycle is an output of hazardous waste and a complex technology for its processing. This task is a strategic one, and economic reason is not sufficient in this case. A structure of criteria for strategic decision making was compiled, and eight groups of main criteria were created. An expert analysis of the criteria was carried out and their relative significance was determined. Results. The significance of economic, environmental, technological and safety criteria is revealed. The formulae for criteria normalizing to apply the integration were proposed. Preliminary multi-criteria analysis has shown that a closed nuclear fuel cycle can compete with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power plants.

show abstract

A new railway tunnel under Brussels? Assessing political feasibility and desirability with competence-based multi criteria analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 28 publications

Moving past sustainable transport studies: Towards a critical perspective on urban transport

Moving past sustainable transport studies: Towards a critical perspective on urban transport

Evaluation of Transportation Infrastructure: A Case Study of Gold Coast Light Rail Stage 1&2

Using multi-criteria analysis to select an energy source

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About