Which Bus Corridors Should Receive Dedicated Bus Lanes? A Multi-Objective Decision Intelligence Approach for Istanbul
Keywords:
Dedicated Bus Lanes, Decision Intelligence, Multi-objective Decision-making, Corridor Prioritisation, Public Transport Planning, IstanbulAbstract
Urban road space is a scarce resource, and dedicated bus lanes cannot be implemented across all corridors in large metropolitan areas. Consequently, transport authorities must determine where road-space reallocation will generate the greatest public transport benefits. This study develops a multi-objective decision intelligence framework for prioritising dedicated bus-lane implementation in Istanbul by integrating four assessment dimensions: feasibility, operational need, strategic importance, and road-space impact. Candidate corridors are identified and evaluated using publicly available transport, traffic, and spatial datasets, including GTFS service information, congestion conditions, network connectivity, accessibility, and implementation constraints. A multi-objective decision model is then applied to generate a transparent corridor-priority ranking. The analysis identifies four Tier 1 corridors as the strongest candidates for dedicated bus-lane implementation: Altunizade-Ümraniye, Kadıköy-Kozyatağı-Ataşehir, Mecidiyeköy-Levent-Maslak, and Avcılar-Esenyurt-Beylikdüzü. The findings demonstrate that corridor prioritisation is influenced not only by congestion levels but also by service intensity, multimodal connectivity, strategic network function, and implementation feasibility. By incorporating explainable evaluation mechanisms, the framework provides transparent justification for corridor selection and supports evidence-based road-space allocation decisions. The proposed methodology offers a practical and transferable decision-support tool for prioritising bus-priority investments under constrained urban road-space conditions.
Downloads
References
UN-Habitat. (2022). World Cities Report 2022: Envisaging the Future of Cities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2022/06/wcr_2022.pdf
Litman, T. (2026). Evaluating public transit benefits and costs: Best practices guidebook. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. https://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf
Vuchic, V. R. (2017). Urban transit: Operations, planning and economics. John Wiley & Sons.
Tirachini, A. (2014). The economics and engineering of bus stops: Spacing, design and congestion. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 59, 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2013.10.010
Currie, G., & Delbosc, A. (2011). Understanding bus rapid transit route ridership drivers: An empirical study of Australian BRT systems. Transport Policy, 18(5), 755–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.03.003
Levinson, H. S., Zimmerman, S., Clinger, J., Gast, J., Rutherford, S., & Smith, R. (2003). Bus Rapid Transit: Volume 1. Case studies in Bus Rapid Transit. Transportation Research Board. https://www.nationalacademies.org/publications/24726
Deng, T., & Nelson, J. D. (2011). Recent developments in Bus Rapid Transit: A review of the literature. Transport Reviews, 31(1), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2010.492455
Hidalgo, D., & Gutiérrez, L. (2013). BRT and BHLS around the world: Explosive growth, large positive impacts and many issues outstanding. Research in Transportation Economics, 39(1), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.05.018
Arhin, S., Obike, K., Manandhar, B., & Anderson, M. (2022). Impact of dedicated bus lanes on intersection operations and travel time model development. Mineta Transportation Institute. https://transweb.sjsu.edu/sites/default/files/2040-Arhin-Impacts-Bus-Lane_0.pdf
Kou, W., Zhang, S., Liu, F., & Pang, L. (2024). Dynamic optimization of exclusive bus lane location considering reliability: A case study of Beijing. Applied Sciences, 14(21), 9777. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14219777
Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
Bertolini, L. (2020). From "streets for traffic" to "streets for people": Can street experiments transform urban mobility? Transport Reviews, 40(6), 734–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1761907
Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. (2024). Open data portal: Public transport, GTFS, and mobility datasets for Istanbul. https://data.ibb.gov.tr
Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Traffic Directorate. (2025). Traffic density and mobility monitoring systems. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. https://data.ibb.gov.tr
Istanbul Electric Tram and Tunnel Company. (2026). GTFS data dataset: Route, stop and service information for the Istanbul bus network. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Open Data Portal. https://data.ibb.gov.tr
Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
Broniewicz, E., & Ogrodnik, K. (2025). Application potential of MCDM/MCDA methods in transport: Literature review and case study. Sustainability, 17(17), 7671. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177671
Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
Sharda, R., Delen, D., & Turban, E. (2023). Business intelligence, analytics, and data science: A managerial perspective (6th ed.). Pearson.
Frisk, J. E., & Bannister, F. (2017). Improving the use of analytics and big data by changing the decision-making culture: A design approach. Management Decision, 55(10), 2074–2088. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2016-0460
Cairns, S., Atkins, S., & Goodwin, P. (2002). Disappearing traffic? The story so far. Municipal Engineer, 151(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1680/muen.2002.151.1.13
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P. (1985). Note–A preference ranking organisation method: The PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making. Management Science, 31(6), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647
Cervero, R. (2013). Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): An efficient and competitive mode of public transport. Institute of Urban and Regional Development. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Bus-Rapid-Transit-(BRT)%3A-An-Efficient-and-Mode-of-Cervero/7e3ef108ab58562329dd9d178aefc1d27f3656fc
Mouter, N., Annema, J. A., & van Wee, B. (2015). Managing the insolvable limitations of cost-benefit analysis: Results of an interview-based study. Transportation, 42(2), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9539-0
Miller, T. (2019). Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. Artificial Intelligence, 267, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007
Doshi-Velez, F., & Kim, B. (2017). Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608. https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.08608
Macharis, C., & Bernardini, A. (2015). Reviewing the use of multi-criteria decision analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach. Transport Policy, 37, 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.11.002
ITDP. (2024). The Bus Rapid Transit Standard. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. https://itdp.org/publication/the-brt-standard/
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Fatih Canitez (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
