Zeng, S; Chung, F and Ashuri, B (2024) Forecasting right-of-way (ROW) acquisition timeline of transportation projects. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 14(2), pp. 129-146. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: Completing Right-of-Way (ROW) acquisition process on schedule is critical to avoid delays and cost overruns on transportation projects. However, transportation agencies face challenges in accurately forecasting ROW acquisition timelines in the early stage of projects due to complex nature of acquisition process and limited design information. There is a need of improving accuracy of estimating ROW acquisition duration during the early phase of project development and quantitatively identifying risk factors affecting the duration. Design/methodology/approach: The quantitative research methodology used to develop the forecasting model includes an ensemble algorithm based on decision tree and adaptive boosting techniques. A dataset of Georgia Department of Transportation projects held from 2010 to 2019 is utilized to demonstrate building the forecasting model. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis is performed to identify critical drivers of ROW acquisition durations. Findings: The forecasting model developed in this research achieves a high accuracy to predict ROW durations by explaining 74% of the variance in ROW acquisition durations using project features, which is outperforming single regression tree, multiple linear regression and support vector machine. Moreover, number of parcels, average cost estimation per parcel, length of projects, number of condemnations, number of relocations and type of work are found to be influential factors as drivers of ROW acquisition duration. Originality/value: This research contributes to the state of knowledge in estimating ROW acquisition timeline through (1) developing a novel machine learning model to accurately estimate ROW acquisition timelines, and (2) identifying drivers (i.e. risk factors) of ROW acquisition durations. The findings of this research will provide transportation agencies with insights on how to improve practices in scheduling ROW acquisition process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision-making; forecasting; novel model; project management; right of way; scheduling |
| Index terms: | quantitative research, scheduling, sensitivity analysis, cost estimating, forecasting, Georgia, variance, accuracy, acquisition, relocation, transportation project, transportation agency, cost overrun, face, decision tree, risk factor, influential factor, decision-making, methodology, estimating, project management, machine learning, estimate, duration, project development, dataset |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, measurement and scaling, data management, project controls, market analysis, transportation engineering, environmental hazards, infrastructure and transport systems, research methods, professional development, project management theory and practice, Geography, operations research, psychology, project delivery, financial and cost management, prediction and forecasting, artificial intelligence, data analysis and analytics, business, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Time Control, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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