Full text
![]() |
PDF
- Users in campus UPM only
- Requires a PDF viewer, such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (421kB) |
Wang, Yang and Monzón de Cáceres, Andrés and Di Ciommo, Floridea and Kaplan, Sigal (2014). An Integrated Transport Planning Framework Involving a Combined Utility-Regret Approach. In: "Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting", 12/01/2014 - 16/01/2014, Washington DC, USA.
Title: | An Integrated Transport Planning Framework Involving a Combined Utility-Regret Approach |
---|---|
Author/s: |
|
Item Type: | Presentation at Congress or Conference (Article) |
Event Title: | Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting |
Event Dates: | 12/01/2014 - 16/01/2014 |
Event Location: | Washington DC, USA |
Title of Book: | TRB 93rd Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers |
Date: | 2014 |
Subjects: | |
Faculty: | E.T.S.I. Caminos, Canales y Puertos (UPM) |
Department: | Ingeniería Civil: Transportes [hasta 2014] |
Creative Commons Licenses: | Recognition - No derivative works - Non commercial |
![]() |
PDF
- Users in campus UPM only
- Requires a PDF viewer, such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (421kB) |
Sustainable transport planning requires an integrated approach involving strategic planning, impact analysis and multi-criteria evaluation. This study aims at relaxing the utility-based decision-making assumption by newly embedding anticipated-regret and combined utility-regret decision mechanisms in an integrated transport planning framework. The framework consists of a two-round Delphi survey, an integrated land-use and transport model for Madrid, and multi-criteria analysis. Results show that (i) regret-based ranking has similar mean but larger variance than utility-based ranking; (ii) the least-regret scenario forms a compromise between the desired and the expected scenarios; (iii) the least-regret scenario can lead to higher user benefits in the short-term and lower user benefits in the long-term; (iv) utility-based, regret-based and combined utility-regret-based multi-criteria analysis result in different rankings of policy packages; and (v) the combined utility-regret ranking is more informative compared with utility-based or regret-based ranking.
Item ID: | 31168 |
---|---|
DC Identifier: | https://oa.upm.es/31168/ |
OAI Identifier: | oai:oa.upm.es:31168 |
Official URL: | http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1288432 |
Deposited by: | Memoria Investigacion |
Deposited on: | 02 Oct 2014 11:58 |
Last Modified: | 02 Oct 2014 12:03 |