Development of A Framework for Comparative Evaluation of Mass Rapid Transit System Technologies

Abstract

newline India s rapid urbanization has prompted an urgent need for efficient, sustainable, and newlinescalable public transportation systems to address the escalating challenges of urban newlinemobility. Mass Rapid Transit Systems (MRTS) are pivotal in enhancing connectivity, newlinealleviating traffic congestion, and mitigating environmental impacts within urban newlinelandscapes. However, the selection and implementation of appropriate MRTS newlinetechnologies in Indian cities remain complex and difficult, often affected by inadequate newlineplanning frameworks, political biases, and a lack of comprehensive comparative newlineevaluations. Existing Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) frequently overlook critical factors newlinesuch as commuter preferences, service quality, and city-specific characteristics, leading to newlinesuboptimal decision-making that favours politically driven choices over commuter-centric newlinesolutions. This study seeks to bridge these gaps by developing a robust comparative newlineevaluation framework tailored to the Indian urban context, considering Nagpur as a newlinedetailed case study to demonstrate its applicability and effectiveness. newlineTo achieve the stated aim, the research was structured into distinct stages. Initially, a newlinereview of existing MRTS selection approaches identified critical gaps, which informed the newlineformulation of the research aim and objectives. A comprehensive literature review was newlinesubsequently undertaken to examine the current practices of MRTS selection in India and newlineassess the potential for formulating a comparative evaluation framework suited to the newlineIndian context. Following this, the requirements for the development of such a framework newlinewere established, and appropriate methodological tools were identified. newlineThe study employed a multi-method approach, integrating the Delphi method, newlineCompromise Programming (CP), and a benchmarking matrix. Expert opinions were newlinesolicited and validated through a three-round Delphi survey, resulting in the identification newlineand prioritization of 27 sub-criteria under the dimensions of service qua