Sustainability evaluation methods for public transport with a focus on Latin American cities: A literature review

IF 3.1 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Alexandra Velasco Arevalo, R. Gerike
{"title":"Sustainability evaluation methods for public transport with a focus on Latin American cities: A literature review","authors":"Alexandra Velasco Arevalo, R. Gerike","doi":"10.1080/15568318.2022.2163208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Stakeholders worldwide commit to the goal of sustainable development and transport, and to the promotion of public transport (PT) as one backbone of sustainable transport. Evaluation frameworks have been developed to aid municipalities and operators in purposefully shaping their PT systems. These frameworks differ greatly in their scope and consideration of the different sustainability dimensions, and in addition, they focus on industrialized countries. The goal of this study is to provide a systematic overview of existing frameworks for evaluating the sustainability of PT systems with a particular focus on Latin America for the first time, to identify possible gaps that result from the specific characteristics of Latin American PT systems and finally to derive research needs and recommendations for this region. The analysis includes three types of articles: scientific papers, international guidelines published by NGOs, and local as well as national Latin American guidelines for PT evaluation. The 69 identified relevant references reveal that Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM), followed by Assessment Indicator Models (AIM) are the preferred evaluation frameworks. Among the MCDM methods, the Analytical Hierarchy Process was the most frequently approach. We found a high prevalence of studies taking society and municipalities’ perspective (both 46%), followed by combinations (users, operators, municipalities − 37%), and the users’ perspective (14%). The review further shows that the Latin American context is not sufficiently considered in the existing frameworks and that further research is needed to develop frameworks that comprehensively and systematically consider all sustainability dimensions for this specific spatial context.","PeriodicalId":47824,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sustainable Transportation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sustainable Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2022.2163208","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Stakeholders worldwide commit to the goal of sustainable development and transport, and to the promotion of public transport (PT) as one backbone of sustainable transport. Evaluation frameworks have been developed to aid municipalities and operators in purposefully shaping their PT systems. These frameworks differ greatly in their scope and consideration of the different sustainability dimensions, and in addition, they focus on industrialized countries. The goal of this study is to provide a systematic overview of existing frameworks for evaluating the sustainability of PT systems with a particular focus on Latin America for the first time, to identify possible gaps that result from the specific characteristics of Latin American PT systems and finally to derive research needs and recommendations for this region. The analysis includes three types of articles: scientific papers, international guidelines published by NGOs, and local as well as national Latin American guidelines for PT evaluation. The 69 identified relevant references reveal that Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM), followed by Assessment Indicator Models (AIM) are the preferred evaluation frameworks. Among the MCDM methods, the Analytical Hierarchy Process was the most frequently approach. We found a high prevalence of studies taking society and municipalities’ perspective (both 46%), followed by combinations (users, operators, municipalities − 37%), and the users’ perspective (14%). The review further shows that the Latin American context is not sufficiently considered in the existing frameworks and that further research is needed to develop frameworks that comprehensively and systematically consider all sustainability dimensions for this specific spatial context.
拉丁美洲城市公共交通可持续性评价方法:文献综述
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Sustainable Transportation provides a discussion forum for the exchange of new and innovative ideas on sustainable transportation research in the context of environmental, economical, social, and engineering aspects, as well as current and future interactions of transportation systems and other urban subsystems. The scope includes the examination of overall sustainability of any transportation system, including its infrastructure, vehicle, operation, and maintenance; the integration of social science disciplines, engineering, and information technology with transportation; the understanding of the comparative aspects of different transportation systems from a global perspective; qualitative and quantitative transportation studies; and case studies, surveys, and expository papers in an international or local context. Equal emphasis is placed on the problems of sustainable transportation that are associated with passenger and freight transportation modes in both industrialized and non-industrialized areas. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial evaluation by the Editors and, if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert reviewers. All peer review is single-blind. Submissions are made online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信