Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory

Policy makers for transportation investment projects engage in dialogues and debates in which reasonableness and clarity are of great value. In traditional transportation systems planning practices, stakeholders reason and provide evidence in support of their preferences, but these opinions often co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nopadon Kronprasert, Antti R. Talvitie
Format: Book Series
Published: 2018
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84921776602&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/45502
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Chiang Mai University
id th-cmuir.6653943832-45502
record_format dspace
spelling th-cmuir.6653943832-455022018-01-24T06:11:23Z Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory Nopadon Kronprasert Antti R. Talvitie Policy makers for transportation investment projects engage in dialogues and debates in which reasonableness and clarity are of great value. In traditional transportation systems planning practices, stakeholders reason and provide evidence in support of their preferences, but these opinions often conflict and are rarely consistent. This paper presents a goal-oriented decision-making method for finding a transportation alternative that best achieves the project's goals and also indicates the level of stakeholders' satisfaction. The proposed method (a) applies a reasoning map for structuring how experts and citizens perceive the alternatives for achieving the project's goals and (A) provides belief measures in evidence theory about to what extent the alternatives achieve the goals of the stakeholders. This method gives three kinds of results. First, the degrees of goal achievement can be calculated for the various stakeholders. Second, hoth the integrity of the reasoning and the quality of information are ev aluated according to measures of uncertainty associated with this information. Finally, the critical reasoning links that matter most to goal achievement can be identified through sensitivity analysis. The paper applies the proposed method to evaluate a streetcar alternative against a bus rapid transit alternative in a real-world analysis of transit alternatives. The reasoning-building process allows planners and citizens to present their logic and justifications, promotes focused discourse of stakeholders, and enriches the quality of the planning and decision-making process. 2018-01-24T06:11:23Z 2018-01-24T06:11:23Z 2014-01-01 Book Series 03611981 2-s2.0-84921776602 10.3141/2453-02 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84921776602&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/45502
institution Chiang Mai University
building Chiang Mai University Library
country Thailand
collection CMU Intellectual Repository
description Policy makers for transportation investment projects engage in dialogues and debates in which reasonableness and clarity are of great value. In traditional transportation systems planning practices, stakeholders reason and provide evidence in support of their preferences, but these opinions often conflict and are rarely consistent. This paper presents a goal-oriented decision-making method for finding a transportation alternative that best achieves the project's goals and also indicates the level of stakeholders' satisfaction. The proposed method (a) applies a reasoning map for structuring how experts and citizens perceive the alternatives for achieving the project's goals and (A) provides belief measures in evidence theory about to what extent the alternatives achieve the goals of the stakeholders. This method gives three kinds of results. First, the degrees of goal achievement can be calculated for the various stakeholders. Second, hoth the integrity of the reasoning and the quality of information are ev aluated according to measures of uncertainty associated with this information. Finally, the critical reasoning links that matter most to goal achievement can be identified through sensitivity analysis. The paper applies the proposed method to evaluate a streetcar alternative against a bus rapid transit alternative in a real-world analysis of transit alternatives. The reasoning-building process allows planners and citizens to present their logic and justifications, promotes focused discourse of stakeholders, and enriches the quality of the planning and decision-making process.
format Book Series
author Nopadon Kronprasert
Antti R. Talvitie
spellingShingle Nopadon Kronprasert
Antti R. Talvitie
Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
author_facet Nopadon Kronprasert
Antti R. Talvitie
author_sort Nopadon Kronprasert
title Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
title_short Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
title_full Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
title_fullStr Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
title_full_unstemmed Reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : Use of reasoning map and evidence theory
title_sort reasoning-building process for transportation project evaluation and decision making : use of reasoning map and evidence theory
publishDate 2018
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84921776602&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/45502
_version_ 1681422757304205312