See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285362768

Framework for assessing cable car construction investment projects:

Examining investment projects in Taiwan

Article  in  Advances in Mechanical Engineering · November 2015

DOI: 10.1177/1687814015620087

CITATIONS READS

5 10,865

2 authors:

Liu Hsin-Lung Wei-Ling Hsu

Minghsin University of Science and Technology Jiaying University
27 PUBLICATIONS   123 CITATIONS    73 PUBLICATIONS   237 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Special Issue "Management and Monitoring of Urban and Rural Ecological Water Resources" View project

Environmental Sustainable Development View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wei-Ling Hsu on 01 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Special Issue Article

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

2015, Vol. 7(11) 1–9
Ó The Author(s) 2015
Framework for assessing cable car DOI: 10.1177/1687814015620087
aime.sagepub.com
construction investment projects:
Examining investment projects in
Taiwan

Hsin-Lung Liu1 and Wei-Ling Hsu2

Abstract
The use of low-carbon evaluation indices for tourist attractions facilitates the promotion of low-carbon tourism.
However, balancing tourism and environmental considerations has become critical to the development of the tourism
market. Compared with road vehicles, cable cars are environmentally friendly, convenient, and economical. This study
presents a framework for evaluating cable car development projects on the basis of the following aspects: (a) determin-
ing guidelines for cable car stations and route layouts, (b) establishing a logical framework for assessing the feasibility of
cable car systems, (c) identifying station assessment items, and (d) evaluating the assessment items for potential routes
by applying the analytic hierarchy process. These aspects can facilitate executing thorough and pragmatic assessments of
cable car development projects.

Keywords
Analytic hierarchy process, assessment framework, cable car

Date received: 8 September 2015; accepted: 9 November 2015

Academic Editor: Stephen D Prior

Introduction Furthermore, cable cars can provide the following

In Taiwan, tourism is flourishing and ecotourism is pro-
gressively growing, and tour itineraries are increasingly
focusing on mountainous and forest regions. Low-car-
bon tourism is an approach to cultivating sustainable
tourism associated with a low-carbon economy. The
core value of low-carbon tourism is to provide a high-
quality tourism experience that ensures that transporta-
tion, accommodation, sightseeing, shopping, and enter-
tainment are associated with low-carbon emissions and
reducing pollution. The use of low-carbon evaluation
indices for tourist attractions facilitates the promotion
of low-carbon tourism.1 However, balancing tourism
and environmental considerations has become critical
to the development of the tourism market. Compared
with road vehicles, cable cars are environmentally
friendly, convenient, and economical.
services.
1. Transportation alternatives and traffic allevia-
tion. Cable car systems can overcome landscape
barriers and directly connect tourist attractions
and major transportation hubs. They can also
be used to create new transportation routes,
1
Department of Leisure Management, Minghsin University of Science and
Technology, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC
2
Department of Leisure Management, Yu Da University of Science and
Technology, Chaochiao Township, Taiwan, ROC
Corresponding author:
Wei-Ling Hsu, Department of Leisure Management, Yu Da University of
Science and Technology, No. 168, Hsueh-fu Rd., Tanwen Village,
Chaochiao Township, Miaoli County 361, Taiwan, ROC.
Email: quartback@hotmail.com

Creative Commons CC-BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
(http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016
2 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

effectively replacing and sharing the burden of 1.
existing roads while expanding the capacity of
transportation services.
2. Connection services between recreational hot- 2.
spots. Cable cars can systematically connect hot-
spots and recreational resources, thus saving
time and travel costs between hotspots, increas-
ing journey flexibility, and diversifying recrea- 3.
tional activities.
3. Outdoor scenery and recreation. Introducing
cable cars can provide a completely new per- 4.
spective for viewing scenery and enjoying recrea-
tional activities, enabling tourists to appreciate
unique natural views and scenery from the air.
Other principles for developing cable car systems are
Therefore, numerous cable car construction plans detailed as follows.
have been proposed to concurrently develop the tourism
market and address environmental protection concerns.
Frameworks for assessing cable car construction Principles of land use and development
investment projects involve numerous factors such as
construction technology, geology, market conditions,
financing, land acquisition, environmental impacts, 1.
and traffic. Such frameworks must incorporate diverse 2.
assessment factors and evaluate them on a case-by-case
basis. In this study, an assessment framework involving 3.
several dimensions and indicators was established using
case examples, research reports, and expert opinions. 4.
Questionnaires were administered to selected experts to
determine the weights of the evaluation dimensions and
indicators. The results of this study verified the feasibil-
ity of this assessment framework and may serve as a Principles of station selection
reference in assessing the effectiveness of cable car con-
struction projects for relevant government departments
1.
in Taiwan.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows.
2.
Section ‘‘Principles of selecting cable car stations and
route layouts’’ describes the principles of selecting cable
car stations and route layouts. Section ‘‘Framework for
assessing cable car investment projects’’ explains the
3.
assessment procedure for the cable car investment proj-
ects, which involves establishing assessment dimensions,
4.
criteria, and weightings through the analytic hierarchy
5.
process (AHP). The results of this study can serve as a
reference in feasibility assessments of cable car con-
struction projects for relevant government departments
in Taiwan.
Principles of selecting cable car stations 6.
and route layouts
7.
This study was conducted based on approximately 40
cable car assessment projects in Taiwan. The four basic
principles governing the selection of stations and route 8.
layouts are outlined as follows:
The target tourist station and its core capacity
should be set as the starting station or terminal
station of a route.
The exterior of cable car starting stations should
have ample space to accommodate affiliated
facilities as well as be a gathering place for peo-
ple and cars.
The selection of cable car stations should be
based on the available transportation hubs and
tourist attractions.
A direct route should be selected to attain trans-
portation utility and minimize construction
costs.
Preserve the connection with natural forests.
Consider the flexibility of future tourism
development.
Construct a high-quality recreational service
environment.
Increase the number of living and recreational
amenities.
Form a coherent transportation system and
mitigate new traffic bottlenecks.
Exploit the advantages of transfers between dif-
ferent transportation modalities and minimize
traffic conflicts during the construction of cable
car stations.
Consider transit and parking problems when
constructing the stations.
Ensure that the base station has a flat terrain.
Appropriate land of sufficient size in the sur-
roundings of cable car stations for development.
In addition to the provision of adequate space
for operating, managing, and repairing cable
cars, consider allocating space for passenger dis-
embarkation, recreation, and greenery.
Consider building a barrier-free space at cable
car stations.
Consider environmental protection and mainte-
nance of scenic views to minimize the impact on
the existing views.
Confirm that the base station is geologically
safe.

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016

Liu and Hsu
Principles of route planning
Location setup limitations. Avoid establishing routes in the
air or on the ground within 4 m of housing facilities,
crowded locations, hazardous storage facilities, electri-
cal wires, railways, roads (except for roads with light
traffic), rivers, lakes, and swamps. However, exceptions
may be allowed when convincing reasons are provided
and when protective barriers are installed to prevent
falling objects from causing damage.
Setup height. For cabins protruding from stations,
maintain a minimum distance of 5 m between the cabin
and the ground, but ensure that the cabin height is not
excessive. Under safe circumstances with protective
measures in place, the minimum distance can be
reduced to 1.5 m.
Inclination of supporting and propulsion cables. The standard
inclination angle of supporting and propulsion cables
should be lower than 30°. If measures are implemented
for strengthening cabin and steel cables, a 45° angle can
be used. A standard cable inclination should be main-
tained between the station and the pillar closest to the
station to account for the emergency braking require-
ments of cable cars entering the station.
Spacing for safety
1. To ensure safe emergency rescue operations, in
principle, a 1-m distance should be maintained
on both sides of the cabin (left and right); under
special circumstances, a 3-m distance should be
maintained between the bottom of the cabins and
any obstacle (such as trees). The distance can be
shortened to 2 m if no safety concerns exist.
2. Space should be left between the supporting and
propulsion cables in both route directions, and
the impact of reaction forces should be consid-
ered. For operational safety, a cabin sway space
(radius 3 0.2) should be provided in both the
directions (or 1 m).
3. When a car is on a two-rail section, a 2-m mini-
mum distance should be maintained between
the rails to ensure operational safety.
Protective measures. When cable car routes cross above
roads, protective measures should be installed on the
roads.
Others
1. Dead ends should be sufficiently avoided in the
route layout to ensure an efficient safety moni-
toring of the entire route.
2. Vegetation and barriers should be removed
from cabin routes that are close to the ground
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016
3
or located in regions that may affect the electri-
cal systems of cable cars. Basic pillars and res-
cue nets should also be cleared accordingly;
however, clearing the parts under the protective
net is unnecessary.
Framework for assessing cable car
investment projects
According to the preceding basic principles, the frame-
work for assessing cable car investment projects can be
divided into the following categories:
1. First, to confirm the characteristic of an invest-
ment project (whether for transportation, tour-
ism, or others), a preliminary analysis should be
performed to determine whether a particular
location should be included in a list of potential
stations. Each hotspot within the region should
be assessed according to three dimensions—
namely, the current situation, demand, and
social aspects—and then be designated as a
starting or intermediate station.
2. After the execution of geological, engineering,
and land assessments, potential locations for
establishing stations are chosen. If a location
fails on any of the three dimensions, it is
removed from the list of possible locations.
3. The characteristics of the starting station, termi-
nus, or intermediate station for a potential loca-
tion are considered collectively to form a
possible route, and an integrated evaluation is
conducted on each possible route.
Initial station assessment
The initial assessment of potential stations involves
conducting a situational evaluation on the three dimen-
sions: (a) current situation (i.e. the current situation of
development in the location), (b) demand (i.e. the future
direction of development in the location), and (c) social
aspects (i.e. the level of support from the public and
government regarding the development of the location).
Table 1 extrapolates these dimensions.
Conducting evaluations according to these three
dimensions provides a preliminary understanding of
whether a location should be shortlisted as a potential
station for assessment and whether the location being
assessed can be designated as a starting or intermediate
station. After further geological, engineering, and land
assessments are conducted, the locations of potential
stations are selected, and the stations are connected to
create a possible route. This possible route undergoes
an integrated assessment and selection, as described in
the following section.
4 Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Table 1. Initial assessment of potential stations.
Assessment dimension Assessment factor
Current situation Commercial or recreational
facilities
Tourist characteristics
Related recreational and natural
resources
Concentration of tourist
attractions
Demand Traffic demand
Economic and tourism
development demand
Maintenance demand
Social aspects Level of support from local
opinion leaders and the public
Level of policy support from
public departments
Cable car feature comparison
Over the past century, the technology for cable car sys-
tems has developed rapidly. Most cable cars have been
constructed in harsh environments such as cold and
snowy ski resorts (e.g. Mt Titlis in Switzerland and
Chamonix Valley in France), near great waterfalls in
regions that are humid all year, near the sea (e.g. Hong
Kong and Singapore), in regions affected by salinity, in
foggy regions (Huangshan), or at the edge of deserts (e.g.
the Great Wall of China). Japan’s Hakone Ropeway is
subjected to extreme environmental conditions such as
hot springs and snow. To date, all these cable cars have
been operated safely. Currently, more than 10,000 cable
car systems have been constructed worldwide. These aer-
ial tramways and lifts are called ‘‘ropeways’’ in Japan.
The following sections describe these ropeway systems
based on their functionality and type:2
1. Functionality.
A. General ropeways. These ropeway systems
are used for conveying passengers or cargo,
and their compartments contain locking
doors.
B. Special ropeways. These ropeway systems
are used for conveying passengers only, and
their compartments contain open seats.
2. Type.
A. Reversible type. Ropeway systems in this
category can be divided into mono-, bi-,
and multicable (three to five cables) systems
depending on the number of cables used.
The most common system involves tracks
containing three or four cables. A reversible
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016
Evidence
Number of facilities such as shops selling local specialties,
restaurants, accommodation, Chinese pavilions, observation decks,
and scenic routes
Local tourists, typical domestic travelers, group tourists, tourists
from Mainland China, and international tourists
For example, hot springs, mountains, forest views, river streams and
ecological scenery, lake views, waterfalls, cloud falls, unique animals
and plants, geological phenomena, and tea plantations
Number of attractions nearby and within walking distance
Examples include the extent of road damage over time around the
location and the level required to repair or replace the railway
Examples include agricultural products, aboriginal culture,
community settlements, historical architecture, and forest railways
The frequency of road damage near the location and the number of
days required for repairs
The level of support from local opinion leaders and the public
The level of policy support from public departments
conveyor style entails suspending two com-
partments to a track rope and using traction
and balancing ropes to haul and shuttle the
compartments back and forth.
B. Continuous type. Ropeway systems in this
category are primarily divided into fixed-
and detachable-grip continuous systems, in
which the compartments are suspended
from a grip connected to cables. Fixed-grip
cable car systems are propelled using a sin-
gle haul rope affixed to each compartment.
Detachable-grip systems suspend each
compartment from a haul rope. When a
compartment enters or exits the station, the
grip that is fastened to the cable automati-
cally holds or releases the haul rope to
achieve continuous propulsion. Under nor-
mal circumstances, because detachable-grip
systems can withstand high-traffic demand
and enable rapid propulsion, they have
been adopted for ropeways that can accom-
modate high speeds and a large transporta-
tion capacity. Fixed-grip cable cars are
primarily used in small-scale transporta-
tion. Table 2 details the features of these
two types of cable car.
Cable car project assessment dimensions and criteria
establishment
Several studies have investigated numerous cable car
plans and concepts proposed in Taiwan. Such studies
are summarized as follows.
Liu and Hsu
Table 2. Cable car feature comparison.
Continuous type
Terrain suitable This cable car type requires short distances
for installation between support towers, necessitating
numerous towers and consequently exerting a
greater effect on the landscape.
Transportation capacity For continuous cable cars, multiple
compartments are conveyed, and they need not
stop for passengers to alight at each station;
therefore, such cars can be used to transport
more passengers compared with other car types.
Compartment space The compartment capacity is low and suitable
for families or small tourist groups.
Construction costs Long routes increase investment costs. However,
because the transportation capacity is increased,
the cost per unit transport volume is diminished.
If the maintenance, type, and components are
standardized for monocable detachable-grip
systems, construction costs can be further
reduced.
Travel safety Because only one steel cable is used, this type is
unsuitable for operation during strong winds. In
addition, if accidents occur, executing rescue
operations is difficult because the numerous
compartments may create obstacles.
Reference: XEC Ltd.3
Sun applied the AHP and established a two-layer
model structure, which entailed considering 5 evalua-
tion factors and 13 evaluation criteria, for enhancing
cable car site selection. The proposed hierarchical eva-
luation framework was optimized after consulting spe-
cialists. A specialist questionnaire was designed on the
basis of the hierarchical framework and was used in
determining the relative weight of the evaluation fac-
tors and criteria. The site selection procedure con-
ducted for the Beitou cable car was adopted to verify
the feasibility of applying the AHP in site selection.
The proposed hierarchical framework and decision
model can be used as a reference for future cable car
site selection.4 Chen5 also applied the AHP to evaluate
the feasibility of constructing a cable car system
between Tataka and the main peak of Yushan at the
Yushan National Park. Chou studied the feasibility of
establishing a high-mountain cable car system and
investigated the planning and evaluation procedures
conducted for the Nantou cable car line, located in
Ren’ai Township, Nantou County. A specialist ques-
tionnaire was administered in this study, and the AHP
was employed to calculate and order the weights of
evaluation factors of the cable car construction in
Ren’ai, Nantou. Moreover, crucial criteria used in
establishing the cable car system were compared for
providing suggestions for relevant agencies.6
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016
5
Reversible type
This cable car type does not require short
distances between towers, thereby reducing the
number of support towers and damage to the
landscape; thus, it is suitable for terrains
featuring canyons.
Operation is based on two-compartment
propulsion. At certain speeds, the transportation
capacity can be reduced by increasing the route
length.
Because of its high compartment capacity, each
shift cable car has a high transportation capacity;
therefore, this type is efficient for group
transportation.
Long routes reduce investment costs. The
reduced transportation capacity increases the
cost per unit transportation volume; however,
maintenance costs are low.
Compartments are heavy and unsuitable for
operation during inclement weather. However, if
accidents occur, rescue operations can be
quickly conducted because of the availability of
special equipment.
Ma investigated tourist attitudes toward high-
mountain cable cars and conducted a case study of the
Kukuan and Mt Anma areas. The recreation opportu-
nity spectrum, attitude theory, and relevant studies con-
stituted the theoretical basis of this research. A
questionnaire survey was administered to tourists, and
independent sample t tests, the chi-square test, one-way
analysis of variance, and Duncan’s new multiple-range
test were used to analyze tourist attitudes toward such
cable cars.7 Tsou adopted social judgment theory (SJC)
to analyze cable car construction in Kaohsiung. SJC per-
tains to the deviation between the subjective perceptions
of decision-makers and an objective environment as well
as the competing subjective perceptions among decision-
makers. Tsou also discussed reasons for cognitive disso-
nance and examined approaches for reducing cognitive
dissonance in public decision-making. Key decision-
making variables obtained from interviews were imple-
mented in an SJC-based questionnaire to clearly examine
the level of cognitive dissonance among decision-makers.
This examination was conducted to provide governmen-
tal departments with a reference for devising policies and
response measures since they face similar disputes.8
Lin and Chang9 used a geographic information sys-
tem to analyze various aspects of site selection for the
Beitou cable car system; such aspects included recrea-
tional factors, safety, environmental influences, and
6 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Project Characteristic

Legal Feasibility

Assessment of engineering techniques

Feasibility of geological environment

Environmental feasibility assessment

Initial assessment of station location

Integrated feasibility assessment

Transport feasibility assessment

Financial feasibility assessment

Market feasibility assessment

Social feasibility assessment

Land assessment

Many limiting conditions Few limiting conditions

A low degree of compromise A high degree of compromise

Figure 1. Framework for assessing cable car investment projects.

impact on the lives of inhabitants of local communities. the AHP in evaluating the sustainability of cable car
Although studies on cable car construction in Taiwan construction projects. Generating priorities through an
have widely adopted the AHP as an assessment method, organized decision-making process entails breaking
they differed substantially in their assessment dimen- down a decision into several hierarchies according to
sions and index content. Moreover, these studies have the following steps:
not proposed assessment considerations of domestic
cable car construction cases regarding the promotion of 1. Define the decision problem.
public participation, but they have mostly rated possible 2. Identify the actors involved.
schemes and assessment indices directly. However, eval- 3. Establish a hierarchical framework.
uating assessment indices is complex, and directly rating 4. Design a questionnaire: This step enables
them is difficult. Therefore, in this article, we propose a obtaining a paired comparison matrix A. If n
revision of the hierarchical evaluation framework and a factors are compared, then the number of
paired comparison to establish a revised evaluation paired comparisons that must be conducted is
mode. Accordingly, a comprehensive literature review n(n 2 1)/2. Because of the reciprocal property of
and in-depth interview with experts were conducted. paired comparisons, if the ratio between ele-
Figure 1 and Table 3 show the cable car assessment ments i and j is aij , then the ratio between ele-
dimensions, criteria, and bases. The following sections ments j and i is 1=aij . Similarly, the lower
detail the establishment of the evaluation mode. triangular matrix of the paired comparison
matrix A is the reciprocal of the upper triangu-
Integrated assessment and selection of routes lar matrix, as shown in equation (1)
2 3
Construction of assessment criteria and weightings. The 1 a12    a1n
AHP has been used in diverse applications,10 including 6
  6 1=a12 1    a2n 7
7
the development of transportation strategies.11–13 In A = aij = 6 7
4    5
this study, the AHP literature14,15 was extended by
addressing the necessity of prioritizing numerous alter- 1=a1n 1=a2n    1
2 3 ð1Þ
natives exhibiting high heterogeneity. The AHP has w1 =w1 w1 =w2    w1 =wn
many advantages over other analysis methods in that it 6 w =w w =w    w2 =wn 7
6 2 1 2 2 7
facilitates simplifying complex decision-making prob- =6 7
4    5
lems by decomposing them into hierarchies, and it is
wn =w1 wn =w2    wn =wn
simple enough to be understood by nonprofessionals.
Therefore, in this study, we examined the validity of

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016

Liu and Hsu 7

Table 3. Feasibility assessment dimensions and criteria for cable car construction.

Dimensions Assessment criteria Assessment Basis

E1 Construction
technology feasibility
E2 Land acquisition
feasibility
E3 Traffic feasibility
E4 Market feasibility
E5 Legal feasibility
E6 Social feasibility
E7 Financial feasibility
E8 Environmental
feasibility
E11 Geological conditions
E12 Terrain conditions
E13 Climate conditions
E14 Cable car system
construction and
maintenance
E21 Zoning restrictions
E22 Air rights
E23 Land acquisition
costs
E31 Transportation
function
E32 Road network
integrity
E33 Disaster relief needs
E41 Demand and growth
E42 Market competition
and investment intentions
E51 Public construction
E52 Economic taxation
E53 Tourism business
activities
E54 Environmental impact
assessment
E61 Public expectations in
the region
E62 Public-sector policies
E71 Investment scale
E72 Return on investment
E73 Payback period
E81 Effects on the
cultural environment
E82 Effects on the natural
environment
E83 Effects on the
ecological environment
Active faults, soil geology, landslides, water and soil conservation,
geotechnical engineering, debris flows, and earthquake concerns
Hinterland, slope, hydrology, flooding, and forest physiognomy matters
Effects of wind direction and speed, lightning, rainfall, temperature,
humidity, and fog
Transportation capacity, model type, power load length (span), station
configuration, tower height and construction methods, power system,
and various maintenance and management concerns
Reconstruction zoning plans, land-use regulations, public versus private
land, urban versus rural land, land management authorities, property
size, land acquisition methods, and land rezoning matters
Whether air rights for the region over which cable car routes span can
be obtained
Land expropriation fees, gratuitous versus nongratuitous appropriation,
and compensation for building demolition
Transportation functions, vehicle load capacity, travel time efficiency,
and energy savings and carbon reduction concerns
Traffic feasibility in addition to railway and roadway integration
concerns
Disaster relief functions
Passenger volume and travel appeal
Market competition and investment intentions
Legality of public construction–related regulations, such as the Act for
the Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects, plan
approval, and funding subsidies
Legality of economic taxation–related regulations, such as land taxes,
profit-seeking enterprise income taxes, and provisions related to tax
incentives
Legality of regulations relevant to tourism business operations such as
designated scenic areas and tourism development regulations
Legality of environmental impact assessment regulations, such as the
Environmental Impact Assessment Act and the Soil and Water
Conversation Act, as well as provisions related to national land
restoration, water conservation, and hillside management
Degree of public anticipation and acceptance, local planning, and
socioeconomic development
Master plans and the administrative policies of various public sectors
Construction and maintenance costs
Internal rate of return, net present value, and self-liquidating ratios
Investment recovery period
Effects on the cultural history of the region, lifestyles of the residents,
industrial/economic activities of local businesses, and recreation quality
Effects on landscape and environmental resources, environmental
carrying capacity, noise, hydrology/water quality, land parcel changes,
and air quality as well as the prevalence of acute mountain sickness
Effects on ecological conservation, environmental sensitivity, and rare
flora and fauna; noise pollution should also be considered

!1n
where wi represents the element weight of i; i = 1, Q
n
2,..., n and aij represents the relative impor- aij
j=1
tance ratio between elements, i = 1, 2, ... , n; j = 1, Wi = ð2Þ
!1n , i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n
2, ... , n. P
n Q
n
5. Calculate the eigenvalue and eigenvector: The aij
i=1 j=1
geometric mean can be obtained by multiplying
elements in every row and then normalizing the
A new eigenvector, Wi0 , is derived by multiplying the
value, as expressed in equation (2)
paired comparison matrix A with the obtained

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016

8 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Table 4. Cable car construction assessment dimension and criteria analysis results.

Feasibility analysis dimensions Dimension Assessment criteria Assessment

weight criteria Weight

E1 Construction technology feasibility 0.137 E11 Geological conditions 0.564

E12 Terrain conditions 0.175
E13 Climate conditions 0.146
E14 Cable car system construction and maintenance 0.115
E2 Land acquisition feasibility 0.134 E21 Zoning restrictions 0.384
E22 Air rights 0.252
E23 Land acquisition costs 0.364
E3 Traffic feasibility 0.083 E31 Transportation function 0.355
E32 Road network integrity 0.294
E33 Disaster relief needs 0.351
E4 Market feasibility 0.112 E41 Demand and growth 0.413
E42 Market competition and investment intentions 0.587
E5 Legal feasibility 0.126 E51 Public construction 0.247
E52 Economic taxation 0.164
E53 Tourism business activities 0.212
E54 Environmental impact assessment 0.376
E6 Social feasibility 0.072 E61 Public expectations in the region 0.627
E62 Public-sector policies 0.373
E7 Financial feasibility 0.177 E71 The scale of investment 0.203
E72 Return on investment 0.466
E73 Payback period 0.331
E8 Environmental feasibility 0.159 E81 Effects on the cultural environment 0.184
E82 Effects on the natural environment 0.271
E83 Effects on the ecological environment 0.546

eigenvector Wi . Moreover, lmax is obtained by divid- requirements, the weights and each scheme were
ing every vector of Wi 9 by the corresponding original applied in determining the priority index (PI) in every
vector Wi , and then calculating the arithmetic mean assessment index. The PI was obtained by calculating
of every derived value the weight Wi and score Xij of each scheme i derived
  from each index
1 W10 W0 W0
lmax = + 2 +  n ð3Þ X
n
n W1 W2 Wn
PIi = Wj  Xij ð5Þ
j=1
6. Execute a consistency test: This step involves
conducting a consistency test to determine the
The specialists directly rated the score Xij of each
consistency index (CI), as expressed in equation
scheme i obtained from each index. Because evaluating
(4). Saaty suggested that the most satisfactory
every assessment index is complex, we proposed con-
CI is \0.1 and that the highest allowable bias is
ducting a paired comparison of the schemes. The
CI \0.2; if the CI falls within this range, consis-
advantage weight of each index was considered its
tency is ensured. This is expressed as follows
score, and the calculation method was identical to the
lmax  n described weight evaluation method executed using the
CI = ð4Þ paired comparison matrix.
n1

Table 4 shows the results of the paired comparisons

conducted in this study. The designed survey was com-
pleted by 14 experts (10 county government supervisors,
2 township office supervisors, and 2 construction con-
sultancy company supervisors). The survey was used to
evaluate the 8 dimensions and 24 evaluation criteria.
Integrated assessment and selection
When the assessment dimensions and criteria weights
determined by the specialists satisfied the consistency
Conclusion
This study adopted a mixed design comprising litera-
ture reviews, observations, and interviews. We per-
formed focus-group interviews for qualitatively
studying and devising the assessment dimensions. A
quantitative multicriteria decision analysis was also
conducted. This study primarily focused on evaluating
cable car construction schemes in order to establish a
hierarchical evaluation framework based on the charac-
teristics of cable car construction assessments in

Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016

 Liu and Hsu
Taiwan. This evaluation framework incorporates
diverse assessment factors weighted according to indi-
vidual case differences. According to the Act for
Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure
Projects and related feasibility studies, the established
framework can serve as an assessment scheme in practi-
cal applications. In addition, on the basis of the assess-
ment indicators, we derived potential recommendations
to conduct paired comparisons and rankings and calcu-
lated the scores of the various schemes. This approach
avoids appraisal difficulties associated with the direct
allocation of scores to various schemes using assess-
ment indicators.
We suggest that follow-up studies extend the estab-
lished framework to analyze the difference in weights
associated with assessment dimensions and criteria,
which are defined by experts from different units, such
as the central government or local government, or
experts in different areas.
In this study, the relative importance in the pairwise
comparison matrix was defined as a crisp value.
However, the experts mostly applied semantic expres-
sions in their subjective assessments. Therefore, follow-
up research may consider applying fuzzy semantic
expressions.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
1. Cheng Q, Su B and Tan J. Developing an evaluation
index system for low-carbon tourist attractions in
China—a case study examining the Xixi wetland. Tour-
ism Manage 2013; 36: 314–320.
2. Li C-M. Alpine cable car set up and management case.
Taipei, Taiwan: Council for Economic Planning and
Development, 2004.
Downloaded from ade.sagepub.com by guest on January 9, 2016
View publication stats
9
3. XEC Ltd. An early stage feasibility assessment of the
Alishan cable car. Chiayi, Taiwan: Alishan National Sce-
nic Area Administration, Tourism Bureau, MOTC, 2009.
4. Sun WS. Application of AHP analysis on Gondola site
selection mode—in Beitou cable aerial tramway. Hsinchu,
Taiwan: Department of Technology Management,
Chung Hua University, 2002.
5. Chen Y-f. Yushan Nation Park: the possidility of an air
cable car from TATAKA area to Yushan main teak.
Chiayi, Taiwan: Department of Tourism Management,
Nanhua University, 2003.
6. Chou Y-M. The research of the establishment feasibility
of cable car in the high mountain area—as an example in
Nantou County. Taichung, Taiwan: Transportation Tech-
nology and Management, Feng Chia University, 2008.
7. Ma H-L. A study on visitors’ attitude towards the develop-
ment of Alpine Cable Car—a case study of Kukuan and
Mt. Anma areas. Taichung, Taiwan: College of Construc-
tion and Development, Feng Chia University, 2005.
8. Tsou T-Y. To analyze the cognitive conflict in public pol-
icy decisions—illustrated by the construction of cable car
in Kaohsiung. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: College of Manage-
ment, National Sun Yat-sen University, 2005.
9. Lin Y-C and Chang K-F. A GIS application study for
installation choices of sightseeing Gondola stations in
the Yang-Ming mountain areas. J DE LIN Inst Tech
2009; 23: 137–158.
10. Saaty TL and Shang JS. An innovative orders-of-
magnitude approach to AHP-based multi-criteria deci-
sion making: prioritizing divergent intangible humane
acts. Eur J Oper Res 2011; 214: 703–715.
11. Shiau T-A and Liu J-S. Developing an indicator system
for local governments to evaluate transport sustainability
strategies. Ecol Indic 2013; 34: 361–371.
12. Shiau T-A. Evaluating sustainable transport strategies for
the counties of Taiwan based on their degree of urbaniza-
tion. Transp Policy 2013; 30: 101–108.
13. Kolosz B, Grant-Muller S and Djemame K. Modelling
uncertainty in the sustainability of Intelligent Transport
Systems for highways using probabilistic data fusion.
Environ Modell Softw 2013; 49: 78–97.
14. Saaty TL. Decision making with dependence and feedback:
the analytic network process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publi-
cations, 1996.
15. Saaty TL. Decision-making with the AHP: why is the
principal eigenvector necessary. Eur J Oper Res 2003;
145: 85–91.