Abstract Owing to financial constraints, it becomes imperative to rank major transport projects to determine implementation priorities and budget allocations. The central Government in Taiwan is using rankings derived from the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and direct subjective rankings to set funding priorities. The current approach does not account for the variations in rankings for setting these priorities. Nor does it adequately consider the compatibility with the proposed projects and the national policies in transport infrastructure development. To address these problems, the Central Government has revised the method for project ranking. The revised method expands the matrix of the attributes and impacts that are to be evaluated. It also uses a Monte Carlo simulation analysis to help in determining the rank orders. A pilot study was conducted to assess the revised method. The study uses 25 major rail projects proposed in 2002 as a test bed.
[1]
Isam Kaysi,et al.
Decision Structuring and Robustness Analysis in Selecting Urban Transit Alternatives
,
2001
.
[2]
R. Ramanathan,et al.
Using AHP for resource allocation problems
,
1995
.
[3]
Karl Kim,et al.
APPLICATION OF AN ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS AT THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR PRIORITIZING MAJOR HIGHWAY CAPITAL INVESTMENTS
,
2002
.
[4]
Wolfgang Ossadnik,et al.
AHP-based evaluation of AHP-Software
,
1999,
Eur. J. Oper. Res..
[5]
T. Saaty,et al.
The Analytic Hierarchy Process
,
1985
.
[6]
Snehamay Khasnabis,et al.
Comparative Study of Two Techniques of Transit Performance Assessment: AHP and GAT
,
2002
.
[7]
Birsen Karpak,et al.
A multiple criteria approach for the evaluation of the rail transit networks in Istanbul
,
2004
.