Comparative Assessment of AHP and MAV in Highway Planning: Case Study

Abstract

A comparative analysis is made between the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the multiattribute value (MAV) functions, using the MAV theory as the basis of reference, in the evaluation of transportation projects. The analysis considers three different perspectives: theoretical support, practicality, and ability to capture the decision maker's (DM) preferences. From the theoretic-behavioral standpoint, it appears that the validity of some of the assumptions of the AHP remain to be formally established, as concluded by several researchers. Secondly, the practicality of AHP was analyzed, in terms of the quantity and type of information demanded from the DM. For an even mix of ratio scale variables and nonratio scale variables the AHP requires less information than the MAV, provided the number of alternatives is less than five. Beyond this limit, the AHP requires more information than MAV. The ability to capture the decision maker's preference structure is analyzed through a case study, to which both methods were applied. In this limited test, the DMs found the MAV theory was slightly closer to their preference structure, though they were not fully satisfied with the results of either model. In spite of this, both DMs declared satisfaction with the insights they gained from the process.