Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2024, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 426 - 441, 31.12.2024

Abstract

References

  • Afrin, T., & Yodo, N. (2020). A survey of road traffic congestion measures towards a sustainable and resilient transportation system. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(11), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114660
  • Al-lami, A., & Torok, A. (2023). Sustainability Indicators of Surface Public Transportation. Sustainability, 15(21), 15289. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152115289
  • Almasi, M. H., Oh, Y., Sadollah, A., Byon, Y. J., & Kang, S. (2021). Urban transit network optimization under variable demand with single and multi-objective approaches using metaheuristics: The case of Daejeon, Korea. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 15(5), 386–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1821414
  • Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S. S., & Omrani, H. (2011). Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 12270–12280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.005
  • Bongardt, D., Schmid, D., Huizenga, C., & Litmann, T. (2011). Sustainable transport evaluation. Developing Practical Tools for Evaluation in the Context of the CSD Process. Eschborn. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=bb1e45d5215ea3123ef371999114c54b1ecf9d e5
  • Boz, E. Y., & Aras, F. (2021). Yeşil araç rotalama problemi araştırması: geçmiş ve gelecekteki eğilimler. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 5(2), 806–821. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jtom/issue/67597/952471
  • Büyüközkan, G., Feyzioğlu, O., & Göçer, F. (2018). Selection of sustainable urban transportation alternatives using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy Choquet integral approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 58, 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.12.005
  • Chandra, S., & Kumar, V. (2020). Crowdsourcing as a social interaction tool to stimulate sustainable transportation mode use. The Open Transportation Journal, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874447802014010109
  • Chirra, S., & Kumar, D. (2018). Evaluation of supply chain flexibility in automobile industry with fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 19, 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-018-0195-7 Ciptomulyono, U., Mustajib, M. I., Karningsih, P. D., Anggrahini, D., & Basuki, S. S. A. (2022). A new multicriteria method based on DEMATEL, ANP and grey clustering for quality sorting of incoming cores in remanufacturing systems under epistemic uncertainty: a case study of heavy-duty equipment. Cogent Engineering, 9(1), 2099056. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2022.2099056
  • Demir, E., Ak, M. F., & Sarı, K. (2023). Pythagorean fuzzy based AHP-VIKOR integration to assess rail transportation systems in Turkey. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 25(2), 620–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-022-01404-x
  • Díkmen, C. F., & Taş, Y. (2018). Applying DEMATEL approach to determine factors affecting hospital service quality in a university hospital: a case study. Journal of Administrative Sciences Cilt, 16(32), 11–28. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/comuybd/issue/40668/420465
  • Falatoonitoosi, E., Ahmed, S., & Sorooshian, S. (2014). Expanded DEMATEL for Determining Cause and Effect Group in Bidirectional Relations. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, 103846. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/103846
  • Fu, X., Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2012). Evaluating green supplier development programs at a telecommunications systems provider. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.08.030
  • Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland, 1(8), 12–14. https://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?hl=tr&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=World+problems%2C+an+invitation+to+further +thought+within+the+framework+of+DEMATEL&btnG= Ghoushchi, S. J., Ab Rahman, M. N., Soltanzadeh, M., Rafique, M. Z., Hernadewita, Marangalo, F. Y., & Ismail,
  • A. R. (2023). Assessing Sustainable Passenger Transportation Systems to Address Climate Change Based on MCDM Methods in an Uncertain Environment. Sustainability, 15(4), 3558. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043558
  • Güven, A., & Keçeci, B. (2020). ENDÜSTRİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN AKILLI ULAŞIM SİSTEMLERİ ÜZERİNE SİSTEMATİK BİR LİTERATÜR TARAMASI. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 4(1), 378–387. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jtom/issue/56013/672542
  • Haghshenas, H., & Vaziri, M. (2012). Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison. Ecological Indicators, 15(1), 115–121. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.010
  • Himanen, V., Lee-Gosselin, M., & Perrels, A. (2005). Sustainability and the interactions between external effects of transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 13(1), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.11.006
  • Hou, X., Lv, T., Xu, J., Deng, X., Liu, F., Lam, J. S. L., Zhang, Z., & Han, X. (2023). Evaluation of urban public transport sustainability in China based on the Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework——A case study of 36 major cities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 103, 107263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107263
  • Jeon, C. M., Amekudzi, A. A., & Guensler, R. L. (2010). Evaluating plan alternatives for transportation system sustainability: Atlanta metropolitan region. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 4(4), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568310902940209
  • Karjalainen, L. E., & Juhola, S. (2019). Framework for assessing public transportation sustainability in planning and policy-making. Sustainability, 11(4), 1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041028
  • Keeble, B. R. (1988). The Brundtland report:‘Our common future.’ Medicine and War, 4(1), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/07488008808408783
  • Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Hashemi-Tabatabaei, M., & Ghahremanloo, M. (2021). Sustainable public transportation evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on fuzzy BWM and MABAC. The Open Transportation Journal, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874447802115010031
  • Kijewska, K., Torbacki, W., & Iwan, S. (2018). Application of AHP and DEMATEL Methods in Choosing and Analysing the Measures for the Distribution of Goods in Szczecin Region. Sustainability, 10(7), 2365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072365
  • Kraus, L., & Proff, H. (2021). Sustainable urban transportation criteria and measurement—a systematic literature review. Sustainability, 13(13), 7113. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137113
  • Litman, T., & Burwell, D. (2006). Issues in sustainable transportation. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 6, 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGENVI.2006.010889
  • Nassereddine, M., & Eskandari, H. (2017). An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 106, 427–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.013
  • Nawaz, S., & Ali, Y. (2020). Analyzing the influence of social, cultural, behavioral traits on cycling and walking in Pakistan. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 7, 100182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100182

Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis

Year 2024, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 426 - 441, 31.12.2024

Abstract

This study proposed a decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) approach for the analysis of public transportation (PT) sustainability factors in Pakistan. After briefly reviewing the related literature, the PT sustainability framework was constructed, and the DEMATEL-based multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDM) approach was developed. The proposed methodology was then applied to evaluate PT in the Twin Cities of Pakistan. The results were presented along with a sensitivity analysis involving six scenarios. The results highlighted the following: 1) Traffic congestion, infrastructure and aesthetics emerged as the most prominent factors for PT sustainability. 2) Air pollution, infrastructure, accident damage, affordability, and aesthetics were among the factors in the cause group. 3) Traffic congestion, accessibility, and human health impact were consistently in the effect group, emphasizing their secondary nature. Their resolution depended on tackling the problems in the cause group. 4) Although environmental factors such as air pollution emerged as the most significant causal factor, they were ranked lower in significance. Therefore, although resolving air pollution was key to improving PT sustainability, its importance was not perceived fully.

References

  • Afrin, T., & Yodo, N. (2020). A survey of road traffic congestion measures towards a sustainable and resilient transportation system. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(11), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114660
  • Al-lami, A., & Torok, A. (2023). Sustainability Indicators of Surface Public Transportation. Sustainability, 15(21), 15289. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152115289
  • Almasi, M. H., Oh, Y., Sadollah, A., Byon, Y. J., & Kang, S. (2021). Urban transit network optimization under variable demand with single and multi-objective approaches using metaheuristics: The case of Daejeon, Korea. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 15(5), 386–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1821414
  • Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S. S., & Omrani, H. (2011). Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 12270–12280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.005
  • Bongardt, D., Schmid, D., Huizenga, C., & Litmann, T. (2011). Sustainable transport evaluation. Developing Practical Tools for Evaluation in the Context of the CSD Process. Eschborn. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=bb1e45d5215ea3123ef371999114c54b1ecf9d e5
  • Boz, E. Y., & Aras, F. (2021). Yeşil araç rotalama problemi araştırması: geçmiş ve gelecekteki eğilimler. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 5(2), 806–821. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jtom/issue/67597/952471
  • Büyüközkan, G., Feyzioğlu, O., & Göçer, F. (2018). Selection of sustainable urban transportation alternatives using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy Choquet integral approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 58, 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.12.005
  • Chandra, S., & Kumar, V. (2020). Crowdsourcing as a social interaction tool to stimulate sustainable transportation mode use. The Open Transportation Journal, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874447802014010109
  • Chirra, S., & Kumar, D. (2018). Evaluation of supply chain flexibility in automobile industry with fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 19, 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-018-0195-7 Ciptomulyono, U., Mustajib, M. I., Karningsih, P. D., Anggrahini, D., & Basuki, S. S. A. (2022). A new multicriteria method based on DEMATEL, ANP and grey clustering for quality sorting of incoming cores in remanufacturing systems under epistemic uncertainty: a case study of heavy-duty equipment. Cogent Engineering, 9(1), 2099056. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2022.2099056
  • Demir, E., Ak, M. F., & Sarı, K. (2023). Pythagorean fuzzy based AHP-VIKOR integration to assess rail transportation systems in Turkey. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 25(2), 620–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-022-01404-x
  • Díkmen, C. F., & Taş, Y. (2018). Applying DEMATEL approach to determine factors affecting hospital service quality in a university hospital: a case study. Journal of Administrative Sciences Cilt, 16(32), 11–28. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/comuybd/issue/40668/420465
  • Falatoonitoosi, E., Ahmed, S., & Sorooshian, S. (2014). Expanded DEMATEL for Determining Cause and Effect Group in Bidirectional Relations. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, 103846. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/103846
  • Fu, X., Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2012). Evaluating green supplier development programs at a telecommunications systems provider. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.08.030
  • Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland, 1(8), 12–14. https://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?hl=tr&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=World+problems%2C+an+invitation+to+further +thought+within+the+framework+of+DEMATEL&btnG= Ghoushchi, S. J., Ab Rahman, M. N., Soltanzadeh, M., Rafique, M. Z., Hernadewita, Marangalo, F. Y., & Ismail,
  • A. R. (2023). Assessing Sustainable Passenger Transportation Systems to Address Climate Change Based on MCDM Methods in an Uncertain Environment. Sustainability, 15(4), 3558. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043558
  • Güven, A., & Keçeci, B. (2020). ENDÜSTRİ MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN AKILLI ULAŞIM SİSTEMLERİ ÜZERİNE SİSTEMATİK BİR LİTERATÜR TARAMASI. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 4(1), 378–387. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jtom/issue/56013/672542
  • Haghshenas, H., & Vaziri, M. (2012). Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison. Ecological Indicators, 15(1), 115–121. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.010
  • Himanen, V., Lee-Gosselin, M., & Perrels, A. (2005). Sustainability and the interactions between external effects of transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 13(1), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.11.006
  • Hou, X., Lv, T., Xu, J., Deng, X., Liu, F., Lam, J. S. L., Zhang, Z., & Han, X. (2023). Evaluation of urban public transport sustainability in China based on the Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework——A case study of 36 major cities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 103, 107263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107263
  • Jeon, C. M., Amekudzi, A. A., & Guensler, R. L. (2010). Evaluating plan alternatives for transportation system sustainability: Atlanta metropolitan region. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 4(4), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568310902940209
  • Karjalainen, L. E., & Juhola, S. (2019). Framework for assessing public transportation sustainability in planning and policy-making. Sustainability, 11(4), 1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041028
  • Keeble, B. R. (1988). The Brundtland report:‘Our common future.’ Medicine and War, 4(1), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/07488008808408783
  • Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Hashemi-Tabatabaei, M., & Ghahremanloo, M. (2021). Sustainable public transportation evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on fuzzy BWM and MABAC. The Open Transportation Journal, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874447802115010031
  • Kijewska, K., Torbacki, W., & Iwan, S. (2018). Application of AHP and DEMATEL Methods in Choosing and Analysing the Measures for the Distribution of Goods in Szczecin Region. Sustainability, 10(7), 2365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072365
  • Kraus, L., & Proff, H. (2021). Sustainable urban transportation criteria and measurement—a systematic literature review. Sustainability, 13(13), 7113. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137113
  • Litman, T., & Burwell, D. (2006). Issues in sustainable transportation. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 6, 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGENVI.2006.010889
  • Nassereddine, M., & Eskandari, H. (2017). An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 106, 427–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.10.013
  • Nawaz, S., & Ali, Y. (2020). Analyzing the influence of social, cultural, behavioral traits on cycling and walking in Pakistan. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 7, 100182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100182
There are 28 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Design (Other), Industrial Engineering
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Noman Shaukat 0000-0002-2059-6329

Şenay Sadıç 0000-0003-1855-1946

Emre Demir 0000-0003-0013-4482

Publication Date December 31, 2024
Submission Date June 27, 2024
Acceptance Date September 26, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 8 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Shaukat, N., Sadıç, Ş., & Demir, E. (2024). Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 8(2), 426-441.
AMA Shaukat N, Sadıç Ş, Demir E. Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis. JTOM. December 2024;8(2):426-441.
Chicago Shaukat, Noman, Şenay Sadıç, and Emre Demir. “Sustainability Assessment of Public Transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: A DEMATEL Analysis”. Journal of Turkish Operations Management 8, no. 2 (December 2024): 426-41.
EndNote Shaukat N, Sadıç Ş, Demir E (December 1, 2024) Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis. Journal of Turkish Operations Management 8 2 426–441.
IEEE N. Shaukat, Ş. Sadıç, and E. Demir, “Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis”, JTOM, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 426–441, 2024.
ISNAD Shaukat, Noman et al. “Sustainability Assessment of Public Transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: A DEMATEL Analysis”. Journal of Turkish Operations Management 8/2 (December 2024), 426-441.
JAMA Shaukat N, Sadıç Ş, Demir E. Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis. JTOM. 2024;8:426–441.
MLA Shaukat, Noman et al. “Sustainability Assessment of Public Transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: A DEMATEL Analysis”. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, vol. 8, no. 2, 2024, pp. 426-41.
Vancouver Shaukat N, Sadıç Ş, Demir E. Sustainability assessment of public transportation in Twin Cities of Pakistan: a DEMATEL analysis. JTOM. 2024;8(2):426-41.

2229319697  logo   logo-minik.png 200311739617396