Tan, J Y (2005) Coordinated budget allocation in multi-district highway agencies. PhD thesis, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
Allocation of funds for multi-district highway agencies has traditionally been decided by the central administration based on pre-determined criteria or formulas with some consultation with regional agencies. In many cases, the consultation process with regional agencies is limited and ineffective, and applying a common formula and basis for funds allocation may not achieve the best results for all the regions and the entire network as a whole. In this thesis, a fund allocation approach utilizing evolutionary optimization is introduced to consider more effectively the different needs and priorities of regions. Multi-agent system approaches to fund allocation in pavement management are introduced to simulate more effectively the participation and interaction of regional agencies in the decision-making as well as to enable the sharing of resources among regions. The proposed approaches are studied and compared with conventional fund allocation approaches commonly used in practice.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Tat, C W and Fang, F T |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | optimization; highway; pavement; decision making; participation |
| Index terms: | interaction, fund allocation, multi-agent system, decision-making, agency |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, artificial intelligence, behavioral psychology, decision analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here