Published Feb 11, 2015
Dragana Macura Milica Selmic


Strategic decisions, such as transport investments, depend on a number of factors of different relevance that are often changeable over time. Evaluation of transport projects is a complex and difficult task, but also crucial for a company’s success in the market. We assume that certain relations of the system elements are functions of time, and thus we apply a dynamic approach – dynamic priorities in multi-criteria decision making. The topic of this paper is time dependent multi-criteria decision making in a transport projects evaluation. The model is tested on real data from the Serbian railway network.


How to Cite

Macura, D., & Selmic, M. (2015). RAILWAY PROJECTS EVALUATION WITH DYNAMIC PRIORITIES – SERBIA CASE STUDY. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v7i1.292


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 2560 | PDF Downloads 197



transport projects, railway projects’ evaluation, dynamic priorities

Ahern, A. and Anandarajah, G. (2007). Railway projects prioritization for
investment: Application of goal programming, Transport Policy, 14, 70-80.
Benítez, J., Delgado-Galván, X., Izquierdo, J. and Pérez-García, R. (2012). An
approach to AHP decision in a dynamic context. Decision Support Systems, 53(3),
Berechman, J. and Paaswell, R. (2005). Evaluation, prioritization and selection of
transportation investment projects in New York City. Transportation, 32, 223-
Boateng, P., Chen, Z., Ogunlana, S. and Ikediashi, D. (2012). A system dynamics
approach to risks description in megaprojects development. Organization,
Technology and Management in Construction, 4(3), 593-603.
Bojkovi?, N., Macura, D., Pej?i?-Tarle, S. and Bojovi? N. (2011). A comparative
assessment of transport-sustainability in central and Eastern European countries
with a brief reference to the Republic of Serbia. International Journal of
Sustainable Transportation, 5(6), 319-344.
Caliskan, N. (2006). A decision support approach for the evaluation of transport
investment alternatives. European Journal of Operational Research, 175, 1696-
Chang, Y.H., Wey, W.M. and Tseng, H.Y. (2009). Using ANP priorities with
goal programming for revitalization strategies in historic transport: A case study
of the Alishan Forest Railwa'. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 8682-
Fang, K. and Yang, M. (2011). Dynamic AHP net for simulation systems
verification. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 3, 707-711.
Feglar, T. and Levy, J.K. (2005). Dynamic analytic network process: improving
decision support for information and communication technology, Paper presented
at the ISAHP, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Ferrari P. (2003). A method for choosing from among alternative transportation
projects. European Journal of Operational Research, 150, 194-203.
Fiala P. (2007). Using analytic network process model in combinatorial auctions'
Paper presented at the ISAHP, Chile.
Fiala, P. (2006). An ANP/DNP analysis of economic elements in today’s world
network economy. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 15(2),
Gercek, H., Karpak, B. and Kilincaslan T. (2004). A multiple criteria approach for
the evaluation of the rail transit networks in Istanbul. Transport Journal, 31, 203-
Gonzáleza, M., Quesadab, G., and Bahillc, T. (2003). Improving product design
using quality function deployment: The school furniture case in developing
countries, Quality Engineering, 16(1), 45-56.
Jowitt, P. (2013). Decisions, decisions. Civil Engineering and Environmental
Systems, 30, 285-293.
Lee, S.M. (1998). Analytic Hierarchy Process for transport project appraisal: An
application to Korea, PhD Thesis, the University of Leeds Institute for Transport
Liu, P., Zhang, Y., Yan, X. and Kuang, X. (2007). The method of interactive
group decision-making for AHP based on experts' dynamic weights. Mathematics
in Practice and Theory,37(13), 85-90.
Longo, G., Padoano, E., Rosato, P. and Strami S. (2009). Considerations on the
application of AHP/ANP methodologies to decisions concerning a railway
infrastructure, Paper presented at the ISAHP, Pittsburgh, PA: United States.
Macura, D., Bojovi?, N., Nuhodži?, R., Šelmi?, M. and Boškovi?, B. (2012a).
Evaluation of transport projects using multi-criteria decision making method.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Traffic and Transport
Engineering ICTTTE, Belgrade.
Macura, D., Boškovi?, B., Bojovi?, N. and Milenkovi?, M. (2011). A model for
prioritization of rail infrastructure projects using ANP. International Journal of
Transport Economics, 38(3), 265-289.
Macura, D., Nuhodži?, R., Bojovi?, N. and Kneževi?, N. (2012b). One model for
rail infrastructure projects selection. Paper presented at the CETRA, Dubrovnik,
Nasrabadi, A., Hosseinpour, MH., and Ebrahimnejad, S. (2013). Strategy-aligned
fuzzy approach for market segment evaluation and selection: a modular decision
support system by dynamic network process (DNP). Journal of Industrial
Engineering International, 9(1), 1-17.
Piantanakulchai, M. (2005). Analytic network process model for highway corridor
plannng, Paper presented at the ISAHP, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Saaty, T. (2007a). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the
Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. (2007b). Time dependent decision-making: dynamic priorities in the
AHP/ANP: Generalizing from points to functions and from real to complex
variables. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(7-8):860 - 891.
Shang, J. S., Tjader, Y. and Ding Y. (2004). A unified framework for multicriteria
evaluation of transportation projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 51(3), 300-313.
Shiftan, Y., Ben-Akiva, M., De Jong, G. and Hakkert, S. (2002). Evaluation of
externalities in transport projects. European Journal of Transport and
Infrastructure Research, 2(3), 285-304.
Tsamboulas, D. (2007). A tool for prioritizing multinational transport
infrastructure investments. Transport Policy, 14, 11-26.
Tsamboulas, D., Yiotis, G. and Mikroudis, G. (2007). A method for multi-criteria
analysis in transportation infrastructure investments. International Journal of
Transport Economics, 34(1), 113-131.
Tudela, A., Akiki, N. and Cisternas, R. (2006). Comparing the output of cost
benefit and multi-criteria analysis. An application to urban transport investments,
Transportation Research Part A, 40, 414-423.
Van Wee, B. (2007). Rail infrastructure: Challenges for cost-benefit analysis and
other ex ante evaluations. Transportation Planning and Technology, 30(1), 31-48.
Wang, X., Zhao, B. and Zhang, Q. (2008). Mining method choice based on AHP
and fuzzy mathematics. Journal of Central South University, Science and
Technology, 39(5), 875?880.
Wey, W.M. and Wu, K.Y. (2007). Using ANP priorities with goal programming
in resource allocation in transportation. Mathematical and Computer Modeling,
46, 985-1000.
Yedla, S. and Shrestha, R. (2003). Multi-criteria approach for the selection of
alternative options for environmentally sustainable transport system in Delhi,
Transportation Research Part A, 37, 717-729.