Evaluation of urban public transport priority performance based on the improved TOPSIS method: A case study of Wuhan

Abstract By comprehensively considering four subsystems (overall development level, infrastructure construction, public transportation service level and policy support), this study establishes an index system to evaluate public transport priority performance. The performance of a public transport priority implementation in the city of Wuhan from 2006 to 2015 was evaluated by applying the structural entropy-TOPSIS model. The evaluation results showed the following: The comprehensive performance of Wuhan’s public transport priority improved from poor to medium, then to good and finally, to excellent. The performance level of the four subsystems showed a trend of increasing year by year. In the future, the performance metrics for infrastructure construction, public transport service level and policy support still have significant room for improvement. While improving the overall performance of public transport, Wuhan should also pay attention to the harmonious development of subsystems and focus on improving public transport priority infrastructure construction, expanding public service levels and providing policy support. The research ideas and methods in this paper provide a realistic basis for improving the performance of urban public transport priority. The further research areas will focus on diagnosing obstacle factors affecting the performance of urban public transport priority.

[1]  Martin Gregurić,et al.  Pilot Implementation of Public Transport Priority in the City of Zagreb , 2015 .

[2]  H. Haghshenas,et al.  Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison , 2012 .

[3]  Takashi Oguchi,et al.  An evaluation study on advanced public transport priority system using traffic simulation , 2017 .

[4]  Amer Shalaby,et al.  Development, Evaluation, and Selection of Advanced Transit Signal Priority Concept Directions , 2006 .

[5]  Soo Chen Kwan,et al.  A review on co-benefits of mass public transportation in climate change mitigation , 2016 .

[6]  D F Howard.  URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT , 1976 .

[7]  Zhang Hong-d.  Evaluation Model for Prior Development Degree of Public Transport Based on Entropy Weight Matter-Element Extension Model , 2013 .

[8]  Patrick Miller,et al.  Public transportation and sustainability: A review , 2016 .

[9]  Yong Liu,et al.  Evaluation of regional land use performance based on entropy TOPSIS model and diagnosis of its obstacle factors , 2016 .

[10]  Alica Kalašová,et al.  The impact of public transport priority on the traffic in the chosen part of the city of Zilina , 2014 .

[11]  Mahmoud Mesbah,et al.  Using delay functions to evaluate transit priority at signals , 2015, Public Transp..

[12]  Cheng Qi-yue,et al.  Structure entropy weight method to confirm the weight of evaluating index , 2010 .

[13]  Christopher J. Koroneos,et al.  Environmental assessment of 9 European public bus transportation systems , 2017 .

[14]  Markos Papageorgiou,et al.  Simulation and Evaluation of a Public Transport Priority Methodology , 2015 .

[15]  Jenny Morris.  Urban public transport , 1981 .

[16]  T HumpidgeC.  Public transport priority. , 1963 .

[17]  Geetam Tiwari,et al.  How the present would have looked like? Impact of non-motorized transport and public transport infrastructure on travel behavior, energy consumption and CO2 emissions – Delhi, Pune and Patna , 2016 .