Evaluating and Ranking of Travel Mode in Metropolitan; A Transportation Economic Approach

Saeid Shafiei, Raeoof Vaelizadeh, Frederic Bertrand, Manouchehr Ansari


Nowadays metropolitans' planners faced with a significant growth of private cars and consequently, creation a lot of environmental costs. To tackle the problem, the planners should find the best suitable way with due to the stakeholders’ views and other affected criteria to encourage the passengers for using the public transportation instead of their own cars. This paper has been performed to identifying and verifying main criteria affecting travel mode selection; getting different point of views; identifying the most effective travel mode from stakeholders' point of view and finally evaluating and ranking of travel modes in in Tehran metropolis. This study is a quantitative research based on survey and two structured questionnaires for passengers, experts and managers. In order to have an accurate data analysis, AHP as an MCDM models has been used to evaluate and ranking of travel modes. By identifying main criteria (variables) affecting travel mode selection, also collecting and analyzing stakeholders’ different points of views, the weight of each related criterion has been identified and determined and consequently the priority of effective travel mode in Tehran metropolis has been achieved. Finally, the managerial report has been prepared.


Metropolitan; MCDM; Decision Making; Travel Mode; Public Transportation.


Drucker, Peter Ferdinand. Effective Decisions. Harvard University. Graduate school of business administration, 1967.

Mintzberg, Henry, Duru Raisinghani, and Andre Theoret. “The Structure of ‘Unstructured’ Decision Processes.” Administrative Science Quarterly 21, no. 2 (June 1976): 246. Doi:10.2307/2392045.

Nutt, Paul C. “Surprising but True: Half the Decisions in Organizations Fail.” Academy of Management Perspectives 13, no. 4 (November 1999): 75–90. doi:10.5465/ame.1999.2570556.

Koopman, P.L. and Pool, J., 1992. Management en Besluitvorming in Organisaties: Een Strategisch Perspectief. Van Gorcum, Assen/Maastricht, 174 pp.

Johnson, Gerry, Richard Whittington, and Kevan Scholes. “The Strategy Lenses.” Educational Leadership: Context, Strategy and Collaboration (n.d.): 96–114. doi:10.4135/9781473915244.n8.

Citroen, Charles L. “The Role of Information in Strategic Decision-Making.” International Journal of Information Management 31, no. 6 (December 2011): 493–501. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.02.005.

Harvey, Michael, David Griffith, Tim Kiessling, and Miriam Moeller. “A Multi-Level Model of Global Decision-Making: Developing a Composite Global Frame-of-Reference.” Journal of World Business 46, no. 2 (April 2011): 177–184. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2010.05.006.

Hatami-Marbini, Adel, and Madjid Tavana. “An Extension of the Electre I Method for Group Decision-Making Under a Fuzzy Environment.” Omega 39, no. 4 (August 2011): 373–386. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2010.09.001.

Starcke, Katrin, Oliver T. Wolf, Hans J. Markowitsch, and Matthias Brand. “Anticipatory Stress Influences Decision Making Under Explicit Risk Conditions.” Behavioral Neuroscience 122, no. 6 (2008): 1352–1360. doi:10.1037/a0013281.

Ernst, Monique, and Martin P. Paulus. “Neurobiology of Decision Making: A Selective Review from a Neurocognitive and Clinical Perspective.” Biological Psychiatry 58, no. 8 (October 2005): 597–604. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.06.004.

Brand, Matthias, Katharina Heinze, Kirsten Labudda, and Hans J. Markowitsch. “The Role of Strategies in Deciding Advantageously in Ambiguous and Risky Situations.” Cognitive Processing 9, no. 3 (January 30, 2008): 159–173. doi:10.1007/s10339-008-0204-4.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.28991/cej-0309174


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Saeid Shafiei, Raeoof Vaelizadeh, Frederic Bertrand, Manouchehr Ansari

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.