01594299

Component

The evaluation and prioritization of transportation investments at the portfolio level presents a complex decision-making problem for planning organizations. Historically, investment decisions were treated as stand-alone problems. Improvement needs and solutions were identified using only engineering-based criteria, with portfolio optimization accomplished by ranking projects in order of criteria satisfaction and then prioritizing funding allocation based on rank. Increasing awareness of the complex interdependencies among transportation, land-use, social, economic and ecological systems has fostered implementation investment prioritization approaches that incorporate increasingly more complex goals and metrics. The simplest among newer decision models is the Weighted Score Method (WSM). More rigorous methods, including the Technique for Ordered Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and Logic Scoring of Preference (LSP), support prioritization driven by asset performance and financial return. A downside of more complex methodologies is a lack of transparency that can foster distrust in results. To build confidence in project prioritization equity associated with more rigorous methodologies, the Colorado Springs Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) engaged collaborating partners in a process utilizing three alternative project scoring and prioritization methodologies: 1) WSM; 2) TOPSIS; and 3) LSP. This paper examines the result produced by each methodology, the suitability of each for the optimization of transportation investment priorities, and acceptance of results. The application of each differing approach is contrasted alternative approaches. Functionality, advantages, and disadvantages of each approach are discussed, and potential enhancements are identified. The effectiveness of the multi-technique scoring exercise in building project prioritization consensus is also examined.

This paper was sponsored by TRB committee ADA50 Standing Committee on Transportation Programming and Investment Decision-Making. Alternate title: Comparison of Alternative Techniques for Portfolio Optimization: Case Study by Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments.

01584066

16-5883

English

13p

2016

Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting

Digital/other

Figures; References; Tables

Capital investments; Decision support systems; Methodology; Multiple criteria decision making; Optimization; Strategic planning

Highways; Planning and Forecasting

Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 2016 Paper #16-5883

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Jan 12 2016 6:36PM