THE STRATEGIC EVALUATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES THROUGH MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS: THE ADVISORS CASE

Research in Transportation Economics

Volumn 8, Issue , 2004, Pages 443-462

  Macharis, Cathy ^a   Verbeke, Alain ^a   De Brucker, Klaas ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 36148941708     PISSN: 07398859     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0739-8859(04)08019-9     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. ADVISORS project, Del. 1./2.1 (2001). Problem identification, user needs and inventory of ADAS.
2. ADVISORS project, Del. 2. (2001). Actor interests, acceptance, responsibilities and users’ awareness enhancement.
3. ADVISORS project, Del. 3, 8.1. (2002). Compendium of existing Insurance schemes and laws, risk analysis of ADA systems and expected driver behavioural changes. User awareness enhancement, dissemination report and market Analysis and ADAS marketing strategy.
4. ADVISORS project, Del. 4.6. (2002). Development of the ADVISORS common assessment methodology.
5. ADVISORS project, Del. 6. (2002). WP6: Multi criteria analysis.
6. APAS; Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, UK; COWIconsult, Lyngby, Denmark; IVTB, Denmark; University of Rome, Italy; Facultés Universitaires Catholiques de Mons, Belgium (1997). Transport Research APAS Road Transport Evaluation Summary Report (Action de Promotion, d’Accompagnement et de Suivi et autres activités). European Commission, DG VII–32.
7. Bekiaris, E., Parkes, A., Stevens, A., & Wiethoff, M. (2001). A structured methodology and preliminary results of ADAS risk assessment, including technical, behavioural, liability and organisational risks. World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems. Sydney, Australia, 30 September to 4 October.
8. Bobinger, R. (1992). The EVA framework. In: Impact Assessment and Evaluation in Advanced Transport Telematics (ATRACC, Advanced Traffic Crash Courses European Training Course in Traffic Systems (Ed.). Sodit, Paris.
9. CEI (1985). Analysis techniques for system reliability – Procedure for failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA). Bureau central de la commission electrotechnique internationale, Genève.
10. Descartes, R. (1637). Discours de la méthode plus la dioptrique, les météores et la géometrie, Corpus des œuvres de philosophie en langue française. Librairie Arthème Fayard, re-edition 1987.
11. R.T Eckenrode Weighting multiple criteria Management Science 12 3 1965 180 192
12. Green, A. E. (1983). Safety systems reliability. Warrington: Wiley.
13. Henley, E. J., & Kumamoto, H. (1981). Reliability engineering and risk assessment. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
14. Hignett, K. C. (1996). Practical safety and reliability assessment. London: E & FN Spon.
15. James, N. et al. (1999). MAESTRO Guidelines for planning and evaluation of pilot and demonstration projects. European Commission DGVII Project. Text available on CD-ROM from MAESTRO project Manager, Transport and Travel Research Ltd, 16 Bore Street, Lichfield, Staffs W13 6LL, UK. See also www.europrojects.ie/maestro .
16. Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P., & Voogd, H. (1990). Multicriteria evaluation in physical planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
17. Perrett, S. et al. (1996). Review of the potential benefits of road transport telematics. TRL Report 220, Volume 2 Part B. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, UK.
18. Saaty, T. L. (1982). Decision making for leaders. Wadtsworth, Belmont: Lifetime Learning Publications.
19. Saaty, T. L. (1988). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Saaty, T. L. (1995). Decision making for leaders. The analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world . Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
21. Zhang, Kompfner, White, Sexton, Maltby, & Morello (1998). Guidebook for assessment of transport telematics applications , updated version. CONVERGE project TR1101 deliverable 2.3.1 (e-mail project co-ordinator Paul Kompfner: p.komfner@mail.ertico.com ).