Bridging decision‐making process and environmental needs in corridor planning

Abstract

Purpose-The aim of this paper is to clarify the spatial multi-criteria workflow for stakeholders and decision makers, for which feedback rankings are vital to the success of the transportation planning. Design/methodology/approach-The experimental approach was designed to integrate in a novel fashion both analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) within a geospatial information system (GIS) framework to deliver visual and objective tabular results useful to estimate environmental costs of the alignments generated. The method enables ranking, prioritization, selection, and refinement of preferred alternatives. The Interstate-269, the newly planned bypass of Memphis-TN, for which a recent environmental impact study (EIS) was completed, was selected as the experiment test-bed. Findings-The results indicate that the approach can automate the delivery of feasible alignments that closely approximate those generated by traditional approaches. Furthermore, via integration of local planning and ancillary spatial data, the method provided alignment results that avoided areas where local opposition was noted in the EIS. This enhanced method based on remote sensing and spatial information technologies delivers low or high-predicted environmental costs per feature criteria and cumulative predicted costs while preserving local values and plans. Practical implications-The method is highly transferable and limited solely by the availability of sources of geospatial data and coordination with stakeholders. The approach was implemented to derive results similar to traditional approaches with benefits in time, costs, and quality of solutions. Originality/value-A novel adaptation of MCDM and AHD within a spatial decision-making framework is presented. The paper suggests a clarification of multi-criteria workflow to design and select least-environmental-cost corridors. The case study application provides a starting point to develop practical tools that delivers environmental benefits through a collaborative process capturing stakeholder values and decision maker opinions.

Modelling of Potential Pipeline Impact Radius and High Consequence Area in a Wetland Sub-Region of Nigeria

“…The AHP technique developed by [27] allows experts develop prioritization strategies for adjudging criteria and alternatives [27]- [30] that best contribute to achieving set goals and objectives. The AHP method drives weight for attribute layers in combination with other attributes [24], and aggregate prioritise on each level of the hierarchy so that corresponding criteria weights can be determined [18] [31]- [33]. The application of MCDA in GIS follows these steps: 1) Criteria selection: identification of relevant data layers for problem solving, which can be presented in thematic layers of specific features and attributes.…”

Using multi-criteria decision making to highlight stakeholders’ values in the corridor planning process

“…In fact, AHP is the simplest decision making method to be prototyped that provides accurate results given a multitude of complementing and con icting values (Kamrani and Nasr 2006). In geospatial analysis, AHP has become popular due to its straightforward implementation and positive results (Nobrega et al 2009;Sadasivuni et al 2009). ese characteristics served as the basis for this research to develop a simple but functional geospatial AHP-based decision-making framework which serves as a mechanism that ranks inputs and produces output maps input ranking-output maps mechanism facilitating decision making at different levels.…”

“…However, the transportation planning process is constantly evolving in response to the dynamics of land use, policy implementation, and economic and environmental impacts. Today, sustainability is frequently speci ed as a target for transportation projects, requiring assessment of environmental and socioeconomic impacts as well as risk assessment (Nobrega et al 2009). GIS and decision-making frameworks are vital to encapsulate and process all these constraints.…”

“…Sadagopan (2000) states that the integration of interactive maps, audio, text, video, and other forms of community or city related data with analytical tools could help the public access and understand information. Similarly, Nobrega et al (2009) note the importance of the stakeholders and decision makers on understanding inputs and outputs about the GIS-based decision-making process.…”

“…Aiming to connect the theoretical AHP-GIS models within real demands from transportation planners, two minor mod-i cations are proposed in and Nobrega and O'Hara (2009) regarding interactions among transportation practitioners:…”