This paper is concerned with the selection of a candidate joint development station (JDS) for a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system. We propose a method to reach consensus for a group decision on the basis of a combination of the analytic hierarchy process and the assurance region model of data envelopment analysis. Several strategies for using this methodology—for example, Delphi procedures—are also discussed. On the basis of these analyses, the evaluators (council members) responsible for recommending the proper candidate JDS for an MRT system in Taichung City, Taiwan, came up with two contenders from among five: one station in Taichung's CBD area and the other in the Situn district. It was not possible to discriminate between the two using multiple criteria for evaluating stations. The evaluators recommended these two stations to the city council, who should now be able to make an informed, objective decision. In this report we have summarized, with emphasis on the methodological aspects, the decision-making processes that the evaluators followed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeltonV, 1992, “An IDEA—integrating data envelopment analysis with multiple criteria analysis”, in Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Theory and Applications in Business, Industry and Commerce Eds GoicocheaADucksteinLZiontsS (Springer, Berlin) pp 71–79
2.
BeltonVVickersS P, 1993, “Demystifying DEA—a visual interactive approach based on multiple criteria analysis”Journal of the Operational Research Society44883–896
3.
ChandranBGoldenBWasilE, 2005, “Linear programming models for estimating weights in the analytic hierarchy process”Computers and Operations Research322235–2254
4.
CharnesACooperW WRhodesE, 1978, “Measuring the efficiency of decision making units”European Journal of Operational Research2429–444
5.
CharnesACooperW WRhodesE, 1979, “Short communication: Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units”European Journal of Operational Research3339
6.
CookW DKressM, 1990, “Data envelopment model for aggregating preference ranking”Management Science361302–1310
7.
CookW DKressMSeifordL, 1992, “Prioritization models for frontier decision making units in DEA”European Journal of Operational Research59319–323
8.
CooperW WSeifordL MToneK, 1999Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-solver Software (Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA)
9.
CooperW WSeifordL MToneK, 2000Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-solver Software (Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA)
10.
de NeufvilleR, 1990, “Successful siting of airports: Sydney example”Journal of Transportation Engineering11637–48
11.
de NeufvilleRKeeneyR L, 1972, “Use of decision analysis in airport development for Mexico City, in Analysis of Public Systems Eds DrakeA WKeeneyR LMorseP M (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 276–287
12.
DeWispelareA RSageA P, 1981, “On combined multiple objective optimization theory and multiple attribute utility theory for evaluation and choice making”Large Scale Systems21–19
13.
DoyleJ RGreenR H, 1993, “Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria”Omega21713–715
14.
DysonR GThanassoulisE, 1988, “Reducing weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis”Journal of the Operational Research Society6563–576
15.
FishburnP C, 1988, “Expected utility: An anniversary and a new era”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty1267–283
16.
FriedmanLSinuany-SternZ, 1997, “Scaling units via the canonical correlation analysis in the DEA context”European Journal of Operational Research100629–637
17.
FriedmanLSinuany-SternZ, 1998, “Combining ranking scales and selecting variables in the DEA context: The case of industrial branches”Computers and Operations Research25781–791
18.
GanleyJ ACubbinS A, 1992Public Sector Efficiency Measurement: Applications of Data Envelopment Analysis (North-Holland, Amsterdam)
HillM JBraatenRVeitchS MLeesB GSharmaS, 2005, “Multi-criteria decision analysis in spatial decision support: The ASSESS analytic hierarchy process and the role of quantitative methods and spatially explicit analysis”Environmental Modelling and Software20955–976
21.
KeeneyR L, 1982, “Decision analysis: An overview”Operations Research30803–838
22.
KeeneyR LRaiffaH, 1976Decision Making with Multiple Objectives (John Wiley, New York)
23.
KouvelisPYuG, 1997Robust Discrete Optimization and its Applications (Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA)
24.
MinH, 1994, “Location planning of airport facilities using the analytic hierarchy process”Logistics and Transportation Review3079–94
OralMKettaniOLangP, 1991, “A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects”Management Science37871–885
27.
PaelinckJ, 1977, “Qualitative multicriteria analysis: An application to airport location”Environment and Planning A9883–895
28.
RamanathanR, 2001, “A note on the use of the analytic hierarchy process for environmental impact assessment”Journal of Environmental Management6327–35
29.
SaatyT L, 1980The Analytic Hierarchy Process (McGraw-Hill, New York)
30.
ShangJSueyoshiT, 1995, “A unified framework for the selection of a flexible manufacturing system”European Journal of Operations Research85297–315
31.
Sinuany-SternZFriedmanL, 1998a, “DEA and the discriminant analysis of ratios for ranking units”European Journal of Operations Research111470–478
32.
Sinuany-SternZFriedmanL, 1998b, “Rank scaling in the DEA context”Studies in Regional and Urban Planning6135–144
33.
Sinuany-SternZMehrezA, 1987, “Discrete multiattribute utility approach to project selection”Journal of the Operational Research Society381135–1139
34.
Sinuany-SternZMehrezABarboyA, 1994, “Academic departments' efficiency in DEA”Computers and Operations Research21543–556
35.
Sinuany-SternZMehrezAHadadY2000, “An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units”International Transactions in Operational Research7109–124
36.
StewartT J, 1994, “Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision making: A response”Omega22205–206
37.
StewartT J, 1996, “Relationships between data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria analysis”Journal of the Operational research Society47654–665
38.
Taichung City Government, 2004Taichung Region Plans: A Plan for the Joint Development Station (JDS) in Taichung Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) System (in Chinese) (Taichung, Taiwan)
39.
ThompsonR GSingletonF DJrThrallR MSmithB A, 1986, “Comparative site evaluations for locating a high-energy physics lab in Texas”Interface1635–49
40.
ToneK, 1989, “Comparative study on AHP and DEA”International Journal on Policy and Information1357–63
41.
WangY MElhagT, 2006, “On the normalization of interval and fuzzy weights”Fuzzy Sets and Systems1572456–2471
42.
WangY MParkanCLuoY, 2007, “A linear programming method for generating the most favorable weights from a pairwise comparison matrix”Computers and Operations Research doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2007.05.002
43.
YamadaYMatsuiTSugiyamaM, 1994, “An inefficiency measurement method for management systems”Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan37158–167
44.
YangTSuC THsuY R, 2000, “Systematic layout planning: A study of semiconductor wafer fabrication facilities”International Journal of Operations and Production Management201360–1372
45.
YoshiharuTKaoruT, 2003, “A comparative site evaluation study for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo”Socio-economic Planning Science3785–102
