对铁路系统振兴、发展和一体化项目评估的贡献:扎达尔城区案例研究

Maja Ahac, Saša Ahac, Igor Majstorović, Ž. Stepan
{"title":"对铁路系统振兴、发展和一体化项目评估的贡献:扎达尔城区案例研究","authors":"Maja Ahac, Saša Ahac, Igor Majstorović, Ž. Stepan","doi":"10.3390/infrastructures9020032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to contribute to the process of evaluating urban rail infrastructure projects through the presentation of the methodology and the results of a preliminary feasibility study concerning the revitalization, development, and (re)integration of the rail with road, maritime, and air transportation in the Zadar urban area. The analysis included the identification and evaluation of rail infrastructure alignment variants that would ensure the revitalization of the existing railway infrastructure, relocation of freight rail traffic from the narrow and densely developed suburban coastal area, promotion of intermodal passenger and freight transportation, improvement of urban and regional accessibility and connectivity, increase of traffic safety, reduction of travel time and operating costs, and decrease of traffic impacts on the environment. By consulting legal frameworks, spatial planning documentation, and analyzing the socio-economic context and existing transportation infrastructure function, six variants for the (re)development of the rail infrastructure were designed. As their design approached the area’s transportation issues from different angles and could contribute differently to the area’s economic, social, and territorial issues, a multi-criteria analysis supplemented with a partial cost–benefit analysis was conducted to select the most suitable variant. The evaluation was based on seven weighted criteria quantified by the normalization of 32 indicator values, scored from 1 to 5, where a score of 5 was considered the highest. Weighting the scores according to the ratios determined through a consultation process with stakeholders resulted in ranking the best variant with a total score of 3.7 and the worst one with a total score of 2.6. To avoid potential objections that the set of criteria weights used was subjective and the result biased, a sensitivity analysis was carried out by systematically varying the weights among criteria. The results showed that the best-ranked variant was also the least sensitive to applied weight shifts, with a score range of 0.2.","PeriodicalId":502683,"journal":{"name":"Infrastructures","volume":"114 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contribution to Rail System Revitalization, Development, and Integration Projects Evaluation: A Case Study of the Zadar Urban Area\",\"authors\":\"Maja Ahac, Saša Ahac, Igor Majstorović, Ž. Stepan\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/infrastructures9020032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper aims to contribute to the process of evaluating urban rail infrastructure projects through the presentation of the methodology and the results of a preliminary feasibility study concerning the revitalization, development, and (re)integration of the rail with road, maritime, and air transportation in the Zadar urban area. The analysis included the identification and evaluation of rail infrastructure alignment variants that would ensure the revitalization of the existing railway infrastructure, relocation of freight rail traffic from the narrow and densely developed suburban coastal area, promotion of intermodal passenger and freight transportation, improvement of urban and regional accessibility and connectivity, increase of traffic safety, reduction of travel time and operating costs, and decrease of traffic impacts on the environment. By consulting legal frameworks, spatial planning documentation, and analyzing the socio-economic context and existing transportation infrastructure function, six variants for the (re)development of the rail infrastructure were designed. As their design approached the area’s transportation issues from different angles and could contribute differently to the area’s economic, social, and territorial issues, a multi-criteria analysis supplemented with a partial cost–benefit analysis was conducted to select the most suitable variant. The evaluation was based on seven weighted criteria quantified by the normalization of 32 indicator values, scored from 1 to 5, where a score of 5 was considered the highest. Weighting the scores according to the ratios determined through a consultation process with stakeholders resulted in ranking the best variant with a total score of 3.7 and the worst one with a total score of 2.6. To avoid potential objections that the set of criteria weights used was subjective and the result biased, a sensitivity analysis was carried out by systematically varying the weights among criteria. The results showed that the best-ranked variant was also the least sensitive to applied weight shifts, with a score range of 0.2.\",\"PeriodicalId\":502683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infrastructures\",\"volume\":\"114 18\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infrastructures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9020032\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infrastructures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9020032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在通过介绍有关扎达尔城区铁路与公路、海运和空运的振兴、发展和(重新)整合的初步可行性研究的方法和结果,为城市铁路基础设施项目的评估过程做出贡献。分析包括确定和评估铁路基础设施的选线方案,这些方案将确保现有铁路基础设施的振兴、将货运铁路运输从狭窄和密集发展的郊区沿海地区迁移、促进客运和货运的多式联运、改善城市和区域的可达性和连通性、提高交通安全性、减少旅行时间和运营成本,以及减少交通对环境的影响。通过参考法律框架、空间规划文件,并分析社会经济背景和现有交通基础设施功能,设计了铁路基础设施(再)开发的六个备选方案。由于这些方案从不同角度解决了该地区的交通问题,并对该地区的经济、社会和领土问题做出了不同贡献,因此进行了多标准分析,并辅以部分成本效益分析,以选出最合适的方案。评估基于七个加权标准,通过对 32 个指标值进行标准化量化,从 1 到 5 分,其中 5 分最高。根据与利益相关方协商确定的比率对分数进行加权,得出最佳变体的总分为 3.7 分,最差变体的总分为 2.6 分。为了避免可能出现的反对意见,即所使用的一套标准权重是主观的,结果是有偏差 的,我们进行了一项敏感性分析,系统地改变了各项标准的权重。结果表明,排名最靠前的变体对权重变化的敏感度最低,得分范围为 0.2。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contribution to Rail System Revitalization, Development, and Integration Projects Evaluation: A Case Study of the Zadar Urban Area
This paper aims to contribute to the process of evaluating urban rail infrastructure projects through the presentation of the methodology and the results of a preliminary feasibility study concerning the revitalization, development, and (re)integration of the rail with road, maritime, and air transportation in the Zadar urban area. The analysis included the identification and evaluation of rail infrastructure alignment variants that would ensure the revitalization of the existing railway infrastructure, relocation of freight rail traffic from the narrow and densely developed suburban coastal area, promotion of intermodal passenger and freight transportation, improvement of urban and regional accessibility and connectivity, increase of traffic safety, reduction of travel time and operating costs, and decrease of traffic impacts on the environment. By consulting legal frameworks, spatial planning documentation, and analyzing the socio-economic context and existing transportation infrastructure function, six variants for the (re)development of the rail infrastructure were designed. As their design approached the area’s transportation issues from different angles and could contribute differently to the area’s economic, social, and territorial issues, a multi-criteria analysis supplemented with a partial cost–benefit analysis was conducted to select the most suitable variant. The evaluation was based on seven weighted criteria quantified by the normalization of 32 indicator values, scored from 1 to 5, where a score of 5 was considered the highest. Weighting the scores according to the ratios determined through a consultation process with stakeholders resulted in ranking the best variant with a total score of 3.7 and the worst one with a total score of 2.6. To avoid potential objections that the set of criteria weights used was subjective and the result biased, a sensitivity analysis was carried out by systematically varying the weights among criteria. The results showed that the best-ranked variant was also the least sensitive to applied weight shifts, with a score range of 0.2.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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