Research on Comprehensive Benefits of Urban Rail Transit System Based on the Joint Evaluation Methods

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 848)

Abstract

In this paper, based on qualitative and quantitative analysis method and the use of theoretical deduction, model building, empirical research and statistical analysis, the comprehensive benefits of urban rail transit system are studied. This paper analyzed the system structure of the comprehensive benefits of urban rail transit system, and described the traffic benefits, economic benefits, social benefits from the angles of causal relationship, then revealed the system correlation and development law of the various benefits of urban rail transit system. In this paper, the analytical hierarchy process and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method were used to establish a comprehensive evaluation model, which constructed the evaluation process and improved the evaluation system of existing rail transit system. Finally, the author conducted an empirical study, tested the evaluation methods and analyzed the results, then put forward some suggestions on the development strategy of urban rail transit system and provided decision support.

Keywords

Urban rail transit Comprehensive benefits Evaluation Traffic benefits Economic benefits Social benefits 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The funds of this paper are provided by the Beijing Polytechnic project of Research on Comprehensive Benefits of Urban Rail Transit System. We very much appreciate the valuable comments of Dongye Sun, Jianghua Gao and Yuan Liu.

References

  1. 1.
    Talley, W.K., Anderson, P.E.: Effectiveness and efficiency in transit performance: a theoretical perspective. Transp. Res. 15, 431–436 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Christer, A., Lars-Goran, M.: Appraising large-scale investments in a metropolitan transportation system. Transportation 19, 267–283 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Phillips, J.Y., Rousseau, J.: Systems and Management Science by Extremal Methods. Kluwer Acadmic Publishers, Boston (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fielding, G.J., Glauthier, R.E., Lave, C.A.: Performance indicators for transit management. Transportation 7, 365–379 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Viver, J.: Methods for assessing urban public transport projects. Public Transp. Int. (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wei, Q.L., Yu, G., Lu, S.: A necessary and sufficient condition for return to scale properties in generalized data envelopment analysis models. Chin. Sci. 45(5), 503–517 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tiry, C.: Hong Kong’s future guided by transit infrastructure. Jpn. Railw. Transp. Rev. 33, 28–35 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    UMTA: Major urban mass transportation investments. UMTA, Washington (1976)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pawlak, Z.: Rough set. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. 11, 341–356 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mette, K.S.B.: Accuracy of traffic forecasts and cost estimates on large transportation projects. Transp. Res. Rec. (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Box, P.C.: Curb Parking Findings Revisited. Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    World Bank: Cities on the Move: A World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review. World Bank, Washington DC (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Allport, R.: A Tale of Three Cities: Urban Rail Concessions in Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, and Manila. Asian Development Bank, Japan Bank for Intonational Cooperation and World Bank, Washington DC (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chris, N., Jeremy, S., Markus, M., et al.: Social cost of railways relative to other modes of transport. Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing PolytechnicBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations