Robust contingency plans for transportation investment planning

A multistage decision process for transportation investment planning is described. Most transportation investment problems inherently involve multiple criteria and uncertainty. To deal with the variations arising from changes in external environments, robust contingency plans should be integrated in the planning process-not after plans are developed-to account for uncertainty. With the proposed decision process, a multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) method is first used to select a set of good potential designs (or potential solutions). Corresponding optimal contingency plans for each design under uncertainty are then prepared. Robustness considerations are used in making the final selection among contingency plans. To demonstrate the proposed decision-making process, a scenario approach is applied to develop a multistage decision-making process for transportation investment planning problems. Finally, an example of regional transportation investment is presented to illustrate the method. >

[1]  P. Yu,et al.  A Goal Seeking Investment Model , 1983 .

[2]  Morris Hill.  PLANNING FOR MULTIPLE OBJECTIVES. AN APPROACH TO THE EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANS , 1973 .

[3]  G. Tzeng,et al.  Energy conservation strategies in urban transportation: application of multiple criteria decision-making , 1987 .

[4]  D. Major.  Benefit‐Cost Ratios for Projects in Multiple Objective Investment Programs , 1969 .

[5]  J. Rosenhead,et al.  Robustness in Sequential Investment Decisions , 1968 .

[6]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Inferring Preferences in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis Using a Logistic Regression Model , 1984 .

[7]  M. Zeleny.  Linear Multiobjective Programming , 1974 .

[8]  Ibrahim Kavrakoglu.  Robust decisions in power system investments , 1982 .

[9]  G Best,et al.  Robustness in Practice—The Regional Planning of Health Services , 1986, The Journal of the Operational Research Society.

[10]  J. Rosenhead,et al.  Robustness and Optimality as Criteria for Strategic Decisions , 1972 .

[11]  Roger Pye,et al.  A Formal, Decision-Theoretic Approach to Flexibility and Robustness , 1978 .

[12]  Y. Haimes,et al.  Multiobjectives in water resource systems analysis: The Surrogate Worth Trade Off Method , 1974 .

[13]  D. J. White,et al.  Entropy and Decision , 1975 .

[14]  W. L. Miller,et al.  Development and Display of Multiple-Objective Project Impacts , 1973 .

[15]  Harald Gerking,et al.  Modeling of multi-stage decision-making processes in multi-period energy-models , 1987 .

[16]  M. A. Grove.  Strong risk invariance in multiobjective programming , 1986 .

[17]  Stelios Kafandaris,et al.  Introductory Management Science , 1984 .

[18]  H. Raiffa,et al.  GAMES AND DECISIONS; INTRODUCTION AND CRITICAL SURVEY. , 1958 .

[19]  D. H. Marks,et al.  Multiobjective screening models and water resource investment , 1973 .

[20]  O. H. Brownlee,et al.  ACTIVITY ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTION AND ALLOCATION , 1952 .

[21]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Scenarios and priorities in transport planning: Application to the Sudan , 1977 .

[22]  Geoffrey N. Soutar,et al.  ANALYZING PREFERENCES FOR INVESTMENT PROJECTS: A MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING APPROACH* , 1980 .

[23]  Po-Lung Yu,et al.  Linear Optimal Designs and Optimal Contingency Plans , 1990 .

[24]  Stephen A. Marglin.  Public Investment Criteria , 1967 .

[25]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[26]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  A Decision Analysis with Multiple Objectives: the Mexico City Airport , 1973 .

[27]  C. Harvey,et al.  Preference functions for catastrophe and risk inequity , 1985 .

[28]  Jean H. P. Paelinck,et al.  Qualitative multiple criteria analysis, environmental protection and multiregional development , 1976 .

[29]  A. Charnes,et al.  Goal programming and multiple objective optimizations: Part 1 , 1977 .