Article Preview
TopLiterature Review
The relevant literature on the evaluation of alternative destinations for a seaplane network is very limited, apart from some fragmentary efforts mainly concerning the optimal design of a transport network (e.g. Iliopoulou et al., 2015, Pagonakis, 2016), without taking into account other socio-economic factors. This paper aims to fill this gap in the literature, by using multi-criteria decision making techniques.
Helping people make informed and, hopefully, better decision is the prime concern of decision making (Keeney, 1992). With multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), it is possible to overcome many of the weaknesses of traditional evaluation methods as it allows factors that cannot easily be quantified or expressed in monetary terms, but nevertheless play a decisive role in shaping the policy, such as the environmental, spatial and social impacts of a project, social justice, etc., to be taken into consideration (Roukouni, 2016). Moreover, MCDA evaluates the alternatives by combining both quantitative and qualitative criteria (Vincke, 1992). A significant number of methods have been developed, including Multi Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) (von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1947), ELimination and Choice Expressing REality (ELECTRE) (Roy, 1968), Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) (Saaty, 1977), Preference Ranking Organisation METHod for the Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE), (Brans et al., 1986), Verbal Decision Analysis (Larichev and Moshkovich, 1997). The evaluation of new transportation projects presupposes the use of methods that can take into account conflicting objectives and combine tangible and intangible criteria (Macharis et al., 2011). The use of MCDA in the research area of transport has steadily risen markedly in recent years (Macharis & Bernardini, 2015).