Designing the most efficient roadway illumination is a strategic and complex activity, as it requires consideration of both environmental and economic factors. The aim of this study is to propose a novel structured multi-methodological framework based on the systematic application of data envelopment analysis (DEA), qualityfunction deployment (QFD), and simple additive weighting (SAW) methods to support a critical decision-making process on roadway illumination design. First, the DEA is exercised to find efficient alternatives for roadway illumination. Then customer requirements are included and satisfied by the QFD. Lastly, using the DEA method, the SAW is used to rank the alternatives which are found to be efficient. As a case study, illumination alternatives for a typical urban roadway are analysed to select the most suitable choice in terms of energy and cost effectiveness, which are of course high priorities. The results show that the proposed multi-methodological approach takes advantages of DEA, QFD, and SAW to select an efficient roadway illumination alternative. The proposed approach also supplies a simple and very well-suited decision-making tool for this type of strategic decision-making issue.
1. Kostic, M., Djokic, L., Pojatar, D., and Strbac-Hadzibegovic, N., Technical and economic analysis of road lighting solutions based on mesopic vision // Build. Environ., 2009, Vol. 44, #1, pp. 66–75.
2. Subramani, C., Surya, S., Gowtham, J., Chari, R., Srinivasan, S., Siddharth, J. P., and Shrimali, H. Energy efficiency and pay-back calculation on street lighting systems // AIP Conference Proceedings, 2019, 2112.
3. Mayeur, A., Bremond, R., Bastien, J. C., The effect of the driving activity on target detection as a function of the visibility level: Implications for road lighting // Transport. Res. F- traf., 2010, Vol. 13, #2, pp. 115–128.
4. Coureaux, I. M., Manzano, E., The energy impact of luminaire depreciation on urban lighting // Energy. Sustain. Dev., 2013, Vol. 17, #4, pp. 357–362.
5. Kostic, M., Djokic, L., Recommendations for energy efficient and visually acceptable street lighting // Energy, 2009, Vol. 34, #10, pp. 1565–1572.
6. Kostic, M., Djokic, L. Recommendations for energy efficient and visually acceptable street lighting // Energy, 2009, Vol. 34, #10, pp. 1565–1572.
7. Mirzaei, M. J., Dashti, R., Kazemi, A., Amirioun, M.H. An asset-management model for use in the evaluation and regulation of public-lighting systems // Utilities Policy, 2005, Vol. 32, pp. 19–28.
8. Rabaza, O., Pena-Garcia, A., Perez-Ocon, F., Gomez-Lorente, D. A simple method for designing efficient public lighting, based on new parameter relationships // Expert Systems with Applications, 2013, Vol. 40, #18, pp. 7305–7315.
9. Wu, M. S., Huang, H. H., Huang, B. J., Tang, C. W., Cheng, C.W. Economic feasibility of solar-powered led roadway lighting // Renewable energy, 2009, Vol. 34, #8, pp. 1934–1938.
10. Liu, G. Sustainable feasibility of solar photovoltaic powered street lighting systems // International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 2014, Vol. 56, pp. 168–174.
11. Radulovic, D., Skok, S., Kirincic, V. Energy efficiency public lighting management in the cities // Energy, 2011, Vol. 36, #4, pp. 1908–1915.
12. Jiang, Y., Shuo Li, Bowen Guan, Guangyuan Zhao, Cost effectiveness of new roadway lighting systems // Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 2015.
13. European Committee for Standardization. Standard EN‑13201: Road Lighting; European Committee for Standardization: Bruxelles, Belgium, 2015.
14. Publication of Minnesota Department of Transportation-Roadway Lighting Design Manual, 2010.
15. Fotios, S., Boyce, P., Ellis, C. The effect of pavement material on road lighting performance // Light. J., 2005, Vol. 71, pp. 35–40.
16. Publication of European Committee for Standardization Road lighting – Part 3: Calculation of performance (CEN/TR13201–3).
17. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Rhodes, E. Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units // European journal of operational research, 1978, Vol. 2, #6, pp. 429–444.
18. Liu J.S., Lu L.Y.Y., Lu W., Lin B.J.Y. A survey of DEA applications // Omega, 2013, Vol. 41, #5, pp. 893–902.
19. Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., Tone, K. Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software // Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
20. Amado, C. A., Santos, S. P., Sequeira, J.F. Using Data Envelopment Analysis to support the design of process improvement interventions in electricity distribution // European Journal of Operational Research, 2013, Vol. 228, #1, pp. 226–235.
21. Sullivan, L.P. Policy management through quality function deployment // Quality Progress, 1988, Vol. 21, #6, pp. 18–20.
22. Mallon, J.C., Mulligan, D.E. Quality function deployment – a system for meeting customers’ needs // Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1993, Vol. 119, #3, pp. 516–31.
23. Kumar, R., Midha, P.S. A QFD based methodology for evaluating a company’s PDM requirements for collaborative product developments // Industrial Management and Data Systems, 2001, Vol. 101, #3, p. 126e31.
24. Alinezad, A., Esfandiari, N. Supplier evaluation and selection with QFD and FAHP in pharmaceutical company // International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2013.
25. Ayag, Z., Samanlioglu, F., Buyukozkan, G. A fuzzy QFD approach to determine supply chain management strategies in the dairy industry // Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2012.
26. Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T., Kiziltas, S. Strategic use of quality function deployment (QFD) in the construction industry // Building and Environment, 2005, Vol. 40, #2, pp. 245–255.
27. Cohen, L. Quality function deployment: how to make QFD work for you // Reading, MA: Addison-Wesely, 1995.
28. Carnevalli, J. A., Miguel, P.C. Review, analysis, and classification of the literature on QFD – Types of research, difficulties, and benefits // International Journal of Production Economics, 2008, Vol. 114, #2, pp. 737–754
29. Edwards, W. Social Utilities. Engineering Economist, Summer Symposium Series, 1971, Vol. 6, pp. 119–129.
30. Shakouri, H., Nabaee, M., Aliakbarisani, S. A quantitative discussion on the assessment of power supply technologies: DEA (data envelopment analysis) and SAW (simple additive weighting) as complementary methods for the “Grammar // Energy, 2014, Vol. 64, pp. 640–647.
31. Yoon, K. P., Hwang, C.L. Multiple attribute decision making: an introduction // Sage Publications, 1995, Vol. 104.
32. Brownlow, S. A., Watson, S.R. Structuring multiattribute value hierarchies // Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1987, pp. 309–317.
33. Akgun, I., Kandakoglu, A., Ozok, A.F. Fuzzy integrated vulnerability assessmentmodel for critical facilities in combating the terrorism // Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, Vol. 37, #5, pp. 3561–3573.
34. Publication of European Committee for Standardization Road lighting – Part 1: Selection of lighting classes (CEN/TR13201–1).
35. Tahkamo, L., Ylinen, A., Puolakka, M. et al. Life cycle cost analysis of three renewed street lighting installations in Finland // Int J Life Cycle Assess 17, 2012, pp. 154–164.
36. Boussofiane, A., Dyson, R.G., and Thanassoulis, E. Applied Data Envelopment Analysis // European Journal of Operational Research, 1991, Vol. 52, pp. 1–15.
37. Ayaz, R., Ozcanli, A.K., Nakir, I., Bhusal, P., Unal, A. Life cycle cost analysis on M1 and M2 road class luminaires installed in Turkey // Light Eng., 2019, Vol. 27, pp. 61–70.

• Previous article
• Next article

• data envelopment analysis
• roadway illumination
• simple additive weighting
• quality function deployment
• multi-criteria decision making