Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorGulcimen, Sedat
dc.contributor.authorAydogan, Emel Kizilkaya
dc.contributor.authorUzal, Nigmet
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-26T08:27:22Z
dc.date.available2023-05-26T08:27:22Z
dc.date.issued2023en_US
dc.identifier.issn0733-9488
dc.identifier.issn1943-5444
dc.identifier.otherWOS:000971222800002
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1061/JUPDDM.UPENG-4090
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12573/1602
dc.description.abstractDeveloping methodologies to facilitate the planning of sustainable transport systems for decision makers (DMs) is becoming more critical. This study proposed a methodological framework for sustainable urban transportation to make decisions during urban transportation's design and planning stages. Urban transportation alternatives were evaluated by sustainability indicators that considered a triple bottom line approach's environmental, economic, and social aspects. To choose the best alternative sustainable transportation scenarios, two multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methods, for example, a hesitant fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (HF-AHP) and multiple attribute utility model (MAUT), were integrated. First, eight sustainable transportation indicators that considered data availability from the transport sector were selected. The weights of the selected indicators were calculated using an HF-AHP. These indicators included carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, energy consumption, depletion of nonrenewable resources, operational and maintenance costs, fuel and taxes, the number of fatalities or injuries, and motor vehicles for public transport per 10,000 population. Finally, sensitivity analysis was applied to validate the robustness. Based on HF-AHP results, the number of fatalities or injuries was the most significant among the eight indicators, with a 0.158 normalized weight (N-i). The results of this integrated methodology highlighted that Alternative 11, which was dominated by low-motorized vehicles (low-MVs), was the best sustainable alternative and Alternative 1 was the worst sustainable alternative, which was dominated by high-MVs with 0.69 and 0.27 total utility values, respectively. Low-motorized urban transportation alternatives showed higher sustainable performances than the motorized and high-motorized alternatives. This study proposed a novel and robust methodology for decisions on sustainable urban transportation projects and renovating current urban transportation systems.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERSen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1061/JUPDDM.UPENG-4090en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectHesitant fuzzy analytical hierarchy processen_US
dc.subjectMultiple attribute utility modelsen_US
dc.subjectMulticriteria decision makingen_US
dc.subjectSustainabletransportationen_US
dc.titleRobust Multicriteria Sustainability Assessmentin Urban Transportationen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentAGÜ, Mühendislik Fakültesi, İnşaat Mühendisliği Bölümüen_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0002-8967-3484en_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0002-0912-3459en_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthorGulcimen, Sedat
dc.contributor.institutionauthorUzal, Nigmet
dc.identifier.volume149en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.relation.journalJOURNAL OF URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENTen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster