Analytic hierarchy process application in selecting the mode of transport for a logistics company

Journal of Advanced Transportation

Volumn 48, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 974-999

  Kumru, Mesut ^a   Kumru, Pinar Yildiz ^b  

^a DOGUS UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b KOCAELI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

AHP; logistics; mode of transport; multi criteria decision making; supply chain

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; LOGISTICS; SUPPLY CHAINS;

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP); DECISION MAKING PROCESS; ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS; MEANS OF TRANSPORTATIONS; MODE OF TRANSPORT; MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; RAILWAY TRANSPORTATION; TRANSPORTATION MODE;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 84916218487     PISSN: 01976729     EISSN: 20423195     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/atr.1240     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Hensher D, Brewer A,. Transport: An Economics and Management Perspective, Oxford University Press: UK, 2000.
2. Hall PK, Wagner WB,. Tank truck carrier selection by bulk chemical shippers: empirical study. The Logistics and Transportation Review 1996; 32 (2): 231-245.
3. Fritz institute, logistics cluster, transport, logistics operational guide. http://log.logcluster.org/response/transport/index.html, viewed July 20, 2011.
4. Maltz A,. Private fleet use: a transaction cost model. Transportation Journal 1993; 32 (3): 46-53.
5. Farris B,. Dedicated contract carriage presentation. Food Marketing Institute, 2004. http://www.fmi.org/facts-figs/conference-pdfs/Outsourcing-Transportation.pdf (viewed May 13, 2011).
6. Southern RN,. Transportation and logistics basics. A Handbook for Transportation and Logistics Professionals and Students. Continental Traffic Pub. Co.: Memphis, Tenn, 1997.
7. Coyle JJ, Bardi EJ, Langley Jr. J,. The Management of Business Logistics. West Publishing Company: St. Paul, MN, 1996.
8. Żak J, Redmer A, Jaszkiewicz A,. Multiple criteria optimization method for the vehicle assignment problem in a bus transportation company. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2009; 43 (2): 203-243.
9. Churchman CW, Ackoff RL, Arnoff EL,. Introduction to Operations Research. John Wiley & Sons: New York (USA), 1957.
10. Vincke P,. Multicriteria Decision-Aid. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1992.
11. Zeleny M,. Multiple Criteria Decision Making. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1982.
12. Steuer R,. Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1986.
13. Zak J,. The methodology of multiple criteria decision making/aiding in public transportation. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2011; 45 (1): 1-20.
14. Roy B,. Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding. Wydawnictwo Naukowo-Techniczne: Warsaw, 1990.
15. Roy B,. Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 1996.
16. Zak J,. Identification of the most important road transportation decision problems. Archives of Transport 2004; 16 (2): 89-109.
17. Zak J,. Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding in Road Transportation. Poznan University of Technology Publishing House: Poznan, 2005.
18. Xu L, Yang J-B,. Introduction to multi-criteria decision making and the evidential reasoning approach. Working Paper No. 0106, Manchester School of Management, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, UK, 2001.
19. Yang T, Hung CC,. Multiple-attribute decision-making methods for plant layout design problem. Robotics and Computer-integrated Manufacturing 2007; 23 (1): 126-137.
20. Hwang CL, Yoon K,. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag: New York, 1981.
21. Saaty TL,. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, 1980.
22. Yang JB, Xu DL,. On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 2002; 32 (3): 289-304.
23. Jacquet-Lagreze E, Siskos J,. Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision making: the UTA method. European Journal of Operational Research 1982; 10 (2): 151-164.
24. Roy B,. The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. In Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, Bana e Costa CA, (Ed). Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1990; 155-183.
25. Brans J, Mareschal B, Vincke P,. PROMETHEE-a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. In Operations Research '84, Brans JP, (ed). North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1984; 477-490.
26. Pastijn H, Leysen J,. Constructing an outranking relation with ORESTE. Mathematical Computational Modeling 1989; 12 (10/11): 1255-1268.
27. Geoffrion AM, Dyer JS, Feinberg A,. An interactive approach for multicriterion optimization with an application to the operation of an academic department. Management Science 1972; 19: 357-368.
28. Benayoun R, de Montgolfier J, Tergny J, Laritchew O,. Linear programming with multiple objective functions: step method (STEM). Mathematical Programming 1971; 1: 366-375.
29. Jaszkiewicz A, Slowinski R,. The 'light beam search' approach-an overview of methodology and applications. European Journal of Operational Research 1999; 113 (2): 300-314.
30. Quattro. Project of the European Union (Working Papers). 1997. D2: Definition and Evaluation of Quality in Urban Passenger Transportation. D3: Tendering and Contracting of Urban Passenger Transportation Services. D4: Link between Customer Satisfaction and Quality Indices, Brussels.
31. Daganzo C,. Fundamentals of Transportation and Traffic Operations. Pergamon Press: New York, 1997.
32. Zak J,. The methodology of multiple-criteria decision making in the optimization of an urban transportation system: case study of Poznan city in Poland. International Transactions in Operational Research 1999; 6: 571-590.
33. Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M,. (eds). Multiple criteria decision analysis. State of the Art Surveys. Springer: New York, 2005.
34. Meza JLC,. Multicriteria analysis of power generation expansion planning. Dissertation. Graduate School of Wichita State University: Wichita, USA, 2006.
35. Keeney RL, Raiffa H,. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1995. Keeney and Raiffa, 1995.
36. Voropai N, Ivanova E,. Multi-criteria decision analysis techniques en electric power system expansion planning. International Journal of Electrical Power Energy Systems 2002; 24 (1): 71-7.
37. Burke WC, et al,. Trade-off methods in systems planning. IEEE Transaction on Systems 1988; 3 (3): 1284-1290.
38. Zak J,. Multi-objective modeling and optimization of mass transit systems. Doctoral Dissertation, Poznan University of Technology: Poznan, 1995.
39. Czyzak P, Jaszkiewicz A,. Pareto simulated annealing-a metaheuristic technique for multiple-objective combinatorial optimization. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 1995; 7: 34-47.
40. Haimes YY, Hall WA,. Multiobjectives in water resources systems analysis: the SWT method. Water Resources Research 1975; 10: 615-623.
41. Steuer R,. An interactive multiple objective linear programming procedure. TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences 1977; 6: 225-239.
42. Korhonen P, Laakso J,. A visual interactive method for solving the multiple criteria problem. European Journal of Operational Research 1986; 24: 277-287.
43. Brans JP, Vincke P,. A preference ranking organization method (The PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision making). Management Science 1986; 31 (6): 647-656.
44. Bana e Costa CA, Vansnick J-C,. Macbeth-An interactive path towards the construction of cardinal value functions. International Transactions in Operational Research 1994; 1 (4): 489-500.
45. Saaty TL,. Decision making with dependence and feedback. The Analytic Network Process; 2nd edn, PRWS Publications: Pittsburgh PA, 2001.
46. Santana EA,. Múltiplos critérios: uma alternativa, apesar das fragilidades das soluçóes. IInd International Congress of Industrial Engineering (Proceedings CD-ROM), Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba, Piracicaba (Brazil), 1996.
47. Zanakis SH, Solomon A, Wishart N, Dublish S,. Multi-attribute decision making: a simulation comparison of select methods. European Journal of Operational Research 1998; 107: 507-529.
48. Salomon VAP, Montevechi JAB,. A compilation of comparisons on the analytic hierarchy process and others multiple criteria decision making methods: some cases developed in Brazil. ISAHP. Berne: Switzerland, 2001 August 2-4.
49. Cheng CH,. Evaluating weapon systems using ranking fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Systems 1999; 107: 25-35.
50. Watson SR, Freeling ANS,. Assessing attribute weights. Omega 1982; 10: 582-583.
51. Watson SR, Freeling ANS,. Comment on: assessing attribute weights by ratios. Omega 1983; 11: 13.
52. Belton V, Gear I,. On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies. Omega 1983; 11: 228-230.
53. Dyer JS,. Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 1990; 36: 249-258.
54. Dyer JS,. A clarification of "remarks on the analytic hierarchy process ". Management Science 1990; 36: 274-275.
55. Roy B, Huggonard J,. Ranking of suburban line extension projects on the Paris metro system by a multi-criteria method. Transportation Research 1982; 16 (4): 301-312.
56. Jamarthanan N, Schneider J,. Multi-criteria evaluation of alternative transit system designs. Transportation Research Review 1987; 1064: 26-34.
57. Gomes L,. Multi-criteria ranking of urban transportation system alternatives. Journal of Advanced Transportation 1989; 23 (1): 53-66.
58. Chang Y-H, Shyu T-H,. A fuzzy multicriteria model to evaluate the privatization of the public bus operations. Journal of Advanced Transportation 1995; 29 (1): 63-79.
59. Tabucanon M, Lee H-M,. Multiple criteria evaluation of transportation system improvement projects: the case of Korea. Journal of Advanced Transportation 1995; 29 (1): 127-143.
60. Ergun M, Iyinam S, Iyinam A,. An assessment of transportation alternatives for Istanbul metropolitan city for year 2000. Proceedings of the 8th Meeting of the Euro Working Group Transportation, The Rome Jubilee 2000 Conference: Improving Knowledge and Tools for Transportation and Logistics Development, Rome, 11-14 September 2000, 183-190.
61. Sawicki P, Zak J, Redmer A,. The comparison of Electre, Oreste and Mappac methods applied to the quality evaluation of transportation systems. In Modelling and Management in Transportation, Adamski A, Rudnicki A, Zak J (eds). Papers of the International Conference: "Modelling and Management in Transportation", Poznan-Krakow, 12-15 October 1999, 223-229.
62. Zak J, Bozek M, Cieslik R,. Muliple criteria method for the selection of the means of transport for the mass transit system. Proceedings of the Scientific Conference: Transportation Problems in Metropolitan Areas under Congestion, Poznan, 8-10 October 1997; 84-90.
63. Czyzak P, Zak J,. A model of an urban transportation system formulated as a multiobjective mathematical programming problem under uncertainty. Journal of Advanced Transportation 1995; 29 (1): 43-62.
64. Czyzak P, Jaszkiewicz A, Zak J,. Interactive decision support system for transportation based on linear and nonlinear optimization. Ricerca Operativa 1994; 24 (70): 51-71.
65. Czyzak P, Zak J,. Multicriteria model for an operation of an urban transportation system under uncertainty. Zagadnienia Eksploatacji Maszyn 1994; 2: 297-309.
66. Jaszkiewicz A, Zak J,. A mass transit system frequency multicriteria model solved by an interactive search procedure. Ricerca Operativa 1994; 24 (70): 27-49.
67. Zak J,. The multiobjective fuzzy linear fractional model of the mass transit system in Poznan. Archives of Transport 2002; 14 (4): 97-123.
68. Czyzak P, Slowinski R,. FLIP-multiobjective fuzzy linear programming software with graphical facilities. In Interactive Fuzzy Optimization and Mathematical Programming, Fedrizzi M, Kacprzyk J, Roubens M, (eds). Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1991; 168-187.
69. Czyzak P, Slowinski R, Zak J,. M-FLIP-an interactive method for multiobjective mixed integer linear fractional programming under uncertainty. Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences 1993; 18 (2): 71-81.
70. Jaszkiewicz A, Zak J,. 2002. Multiple-objective bus drivers' scheduling by the Pareto memetic algorithm. Proceedings of the 16th Multiple Criteria Decision Making World Conference, Semmering, 18-22 February 2002; 126-129.
71. Zak J, Jaszkiewicz A, Redmer A,. Multicriteria optimization method for the vehicle assignment problem in the bus transportation company. Proceedings of the 13th Mini-Euro Conference: Handling Uncertainty in the Analysis of Traffic and Transportation Systems, Bari, 10-13 June 2002; 658-664 (Full, revised text submitted to Transportation Research, Part B).
72. Özkan B, Başligil H,. Evaluating transportation types according to different sectors: a multi criteria decision making methodology. 7th International Logistics & Supply Chain Congress, 2009; 439-443.
73. Sipahi S, Timor M,. The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications. Management Decision 2010; 48 (5): 775-808.
74. Saaty T,. Transport planning with multiple criteria: the analytic hierarchy process applications and progress review. Journal of Advanced Transportation 1995; 29 (1): 81-126.
75. Gercek H, Karpak B, Kilincaslan T,. A multiple criteria approach for the evaluation of the rail transit networks in Istanbul. Presentation of the 8th World Conference on Transport Research, Antwerp, 12-17 July 1998, Working paper.
76. Hsu TH,. Public transportation system project evaluation: a fuzzy Delphi AHP. Presentation of the 8th World Conference on Transport Research, Antwerp, 12-17 July 1998, Working paper. http://www.ptvamerica.com 2006.
77. Piantanakulchai M, Saengkhao N,. Evaluation of alternatives in transportation planning using multi-stakeholders multi-objectives AHP modeling. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies 2003; 4: 1613-1628.
78. Pogarcic I, Francic M, Davidovic V,. Application of AHP method in traffic planning. ISEP, 2008.
79. Tuzkaya UR, Önüt S,. A fuzzy analytic network process based approach to transportation mode selection between Turkey and Germany: a case study. Information Sciences 2008; 178 (15): 3133-3146.
80. Qu L, Chen Y, Mu XA,. Transport mode selection method for multimodal transportation based on an adaptive ANN system. IEEE Computer Society 2008; 3: 436-440.
81. Hanaoka S, Kunadhamraks P,. Multiple criteria and fuzzy based evaluation of logistics performance for intermodal transportation. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2009; 43 (2): 123-153.
82. Chung M-C, Wei C-H, Chen C-J,. Hierarchical evaluation scheme on technology sourcing for advanced public transport systems. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2009; 43 (1): 89-111.
83. Torfi F, Farahani RZ,. Fuzzy AHP to determine the relative weights of evaluation criteria and fuzzy TOPSIS to rank the alternatives. Applied Soft Computing 2010; 10 (2): 520-528.
84. Lee JW, Kim SH,. Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Computers and Operations Research 2000; 27: 367-382.
85. Wong JKW, Li H,. Application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems. Building and Environment 2008; 43 (1): 108-125.
86. Hafeez K, Malak N, Zhang YB,. Outsourcing non-core assets and competences of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. Computers and Operations Research 2007; 34 (12): 3592-3608.
87. Okada H, Styles SW, Grismer ME,. Application of the analytic hierarchy process to irrigation project improvement: Part I. Impacts of irrigation project internal processes on crop yields. Agricultural Water Management 2008; 95 (3): 199-204.
88. Brent AC, Rogers DEC, Ramabitsa-Siimane TSM, Rohwer MB,. Application of the analytical hierarchy process to establish health care waste management systems that minimize infection risks in developing countries. European Journal of Operational Research 2007; 181 (1): 403-424.
89. Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL,. The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: a literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 2008; 189 (1): 194-207.
90. Yavuz M, Iphar M, Once G,. The optimum support design selection by using AHP method for the main haulage road in WLC Tuncbilek colliery. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 2008; 23 (2): 111-119.
91. Chang CW, Wu CR, Lin CT, Chen HC,. An application of AHP and sensitivity analysis for selecting the best slicing machine. Computers and Industrial Engineering 2007; 52 (2): 296-307.
92. Bertolini M, Braglia M, Carmignani G,. Application of the AHP methodology in making a proposal for a public work contract. International Journal of Project Management 2006; 24 (5): 422-430.
93. Karami E,. Appropriateness of farmers' adoption of irrigation methods: the application of the AHP model. Agricultural Systems 2006; 87 (1): 101-119.
94. Hajeeh M, Al-Othman A,. Application of the analytical hierarchy process in the selection of desalination plants. Desalination 2005; 174 (1): 97-108.
95. Yurdakul M, Ic YT,. AHP approach in the credit evaluation of the manufacturing firms in Turkey. International Journal of Production Economics 2004; 88 (3): 269-289.
96. Yurdakul M,. AHP as a strategic decision-making tool to justify machine tool selection. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2004; 146 (3): 365-376.
97. Saaty TL,. Axiomatic foundations of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 1986; 32: 841-855.
98. Saaty TL,. Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, USA, 1994.
99. Saaty TL,. Decision Making, Scaling, and Number Crunching. Decision Sciences 1989; 20 (2): 404-409.
100. Zakarian A, Kusiak A,. Forming teams: an analytical approach. IIE Transactions 1999; 31 (1): 85-97.
101. Shang JS,. Multi-criteria facility layout problem: an integrated approach. European Journal of Operational Research 1993; 66 (3): 291-304.
102. New Actros-more mileage from less diesel. 2011. http://www.daimler.com/dccom/0-5-7153-1- 1405790-1-0-0-0-0-1-8-7145-0-0-0-0-0-0-0.html, viewed April 25, 2012.
103. Gürsoy M,. Ülkemiz yük ulaşiminda çok türlü taşimaciliʇin sinirlarinin ve/veya boyutlarinin belirlenmesine yönelik bir karar destekleyici model. Doktora Tezi, Yildiz Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, ̄stanbul, 2003; 79.
104. Ülgen S, Guerin SS, Tekçe M,. Ulaştirma Raporu, 2007. 3. 138. http://edam.org.tr/document/ulatrma%20sektr%20raporu%20129-189.pdf
105. Tuzkaya UR,. Evaluating the environmental effects of transportation modes using an integrated methodology and an application. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Tech. 2009; 6 (2): 277-290.
106. Emissions of ozone precursors (CSI 002)-Assessment. 2011. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/emissions-of-ozone-precursotonrs-version-2/assessment-1, viewed April 20, 2012.