1. Robustness in assessment of strategic transport projects The 21st International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making Jyväskylä June 13-17. 2011 Anders Vestergaard Jensen Department of Transport Technical University of Denmark

2. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20112 Introduction The paper is developed as part of the Ph.D study: Appraisal of Transport Projects: Assessing Robustness in Decision Making The focus is on: –Dealing with subjectivity in assessment of larger transport projects –Transparent decision making process –Consensus –Communicative issues The background can be seen from the following statements –Policy-making has entered an era in which societal benefits of governmental actions are increasingly questioned. –Multi criteria analysis (MCA) is of growing importance due to inclusion of non-economic factors, MCA criteria weights are in this respect the decisive factors in decision-making.

3. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Strategic decision making Recognizing that formal economic evaluation analyses tend to be inadequate – because objectives often are broader than pure economic or market concerns Focus is on transparent decision making processes For public decision making - decisions need to be justifiable There is a need to research the subjective part of the decision processes and the role of the decision support 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20113

4. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Appraisal approach 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20114 Assumption:  Finite set of alternatives  Idealized preference structure (participants are assumed to avoid strategic behavior) Methodology  Pair wise comparisons  Multiplicative AHP (REMBRANDT)  Rank order weights (ROD) Decision conference  Stakeholder preferences  Tailored to specific decision problem Robustness analysis Weight stability interval Group processes Technical

5. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Framework 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20115 Decision Conference Definition of MCA Criteria Pair wise comparisons using REMBRANDT Weighting of criteria using rank order Set of alternatives Cost Benefit Analysis Multi Criteria Analysis Robustness Analysis Input to the decision making process

6. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Robustness Analysis Robustness of the assessment of alternatives is in this context explored by focusing on the uncertainties in the different model components Specifically the uncertainty relating to the criteria weights is examined This examination is carried out by modeling the influence that the weights have on the preference order of the alternatives The purpose is to create understanding and consensus of the decision making outcome 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20116

7. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Weight stability intervals (WSI) Investigate how the desirability of the alternatives changes when all the weights of the criteria are kept constant except for one criterion. We change 1 criterion (C i ): All other weights are adjusted so only the importance of C i relative to the other criteria is modified: and are related and constrained as follows: and 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20117

8. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Case: Elsinore-Helsingborg Connection Alternatives (all tunnels): 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20118 Alternatives A1Passenger train – Public transport A2Passenger train and car (dual tunnel) A3Passenger and goods train. car (dual tunnel) A4Passenger and goods train. car (single tunnel) All alternatives have been found to be socio- economic feasible

9. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Appraisal Criteria: –Construction cost, maintenance, scrap value, time savings, operating costs, emissions, revenue (tickets) –Impact on towns and land-use –Regional economy –Transport network and accessibility –Impact on greening of transport –Impact on flexibility in logistics 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 20119

10. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Pair wise comparison Criterion:Socio-economic robustness Alt1Alt2Alt3Alt4GeoMean Alt10-6-5-70.044 Alt26012.828 Alt350-21.414 Alt471205.657 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201110

11. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Overall score Criteria Criterion weight The alternative score within criterion Alt1Alt2Alt3Alt4 Socio-economic robustness0.2970.0442.8281.4145.657 Town and land-use0.1390.0221.4145.657 Regional economics0.1880.0740.8416.7272.378 Transport network and accessibility 0.2410.0740.8416.7272.378 Greening of transport0.0910.5950.0378.0005.657 Flexibility on logistics0.0450.0220.7078.000 Weighted score: 0.0620.9684.2333.960 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201111

12. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Weights assessed by the DMs 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201112

13. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Weight intervals 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201113

14. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Weight stability 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201114 Upper and lower weights Weight

15. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Weight Stability Interval In the interval defined by the lower and upper the preference order does not change 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201115 Criteria Group weight Lower stable Upper stable Socio-economic robustness0.29700.329 Town and land-use0.13901 Regional economics0.1880.1321 Transport network and accessibility 0.2410.1881 Greening of transport0.09100.545 Flexibility on logistics0.04501 Top ranked alternatives shift preference

16. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201116

17. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201117

18. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201118

19. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201119 Weight stability intervals

20. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Framework 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201120 Decision Conference Definition of MCA Criteria Pair wise comparisons using REMBRANDT Weighting of criteria using rank order Set of alternatives Cost Benefit Analysis Multi Criteria Analysis Robustness Analysis Input to the decision making process

21. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Conclusions (I) Case: A small increase on the weight on the CBA will result in a change of preference order –Within the stated weight range from the DMs A minor decrease in the weights for Regional economic and Transport network and accessibility will change the preference order –Within the stated weight range from the DMs Variations in 3 out of 6 criteria weights will not alter the preference order of the top ranked alternatives Only changes in 2 criteria weights can influence on the top preferred alternatives 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201121

22. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Conclusions (II) Methodology : Possible to determine if changes in the criteria weights are critical for the preference order of alternatives Transparent analysis, which can be communicated to DMs Assessing the impact of the subjective weights Perspectives: A ‘full scale’ decision conference is to be held with experts in October Modification of methodology when tested on ‘real’ decision makers 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201122

23. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark The work presented in these slides is part of the Øresund EcoMobility project and co- funded by the EU / Interreg IV A Ø KS Programme http://www.oresundecomobility.org 15.06.201123Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 2011

24. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201124 Thank you…

25. 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201125

26. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark Socio-economic robustness criterion 15.06.2011Anders Vestergaard Jensen - MCDM 201126 AlternativeB/C rate Socio-economic robustness Alt11.2327% Alt22.6977% Alt32.2569% Alt43.1082%

27. DTU Transport. Technical University of Denmark REMBRANDT calculations A1, A2, A3 and A4, are compared in a pair wise way under the five criteria The final scores are calculated using the multiplicative model and normalised: A1: 0.71 0.19. 4.00 0.06. 1.00 0.27. 4.00 0.12. 0.50 0.36 = 0.93~ 0.12 A2: 0.04 0.19. 4.00 0.06. 0.03 0.27. 16.00 0.12. 0.03 0.36 = 0.09 ~ 0.01 A3: 11.31 0.19. 0.25 0.06. 16.00 0.27. 0.06 0.12. 4.00 0.36 = 3.69 ~ 0.47 A4: 2.83 0.19. 0.25 0.06. 2.00 0.27. 0.25 0.12. 16.00 0.36 = 3.12 ~ 0.40 13-06-2011MCDM 2011, Jyväskylä27 Pair wise comparisons (δ jk )Transformations (γ = 0.7) Geo. mean A1A2A3A4A1A2A3A4Score A104-4-2 1160.06250.25 0.71 A2-40-8-6 0.062510.00390.0156 0.04 A34802 1625614 11.31 A426-20 4640.251 2.83