Ranking Specific Indicators for Sustainable Transportation Evaluation Based on Social Networks (Twitter)
Keywords:
Sustainable transportation, urban mobility, Twitter analysis, Delphi method, sustainability indicators, social factors, economic factors, environmental factors, urban planning, sentiment analysisAbstract
Objective: This study aims to rank the key sustainability indicators for urban transportation using data extracted from Twitter and a Delphi method for expert validation.
Methodology: The study utilized a two-stage approach: first, data collection from Twitter using relevant keywords and hashtags over two distinct periods (September 2020–April 2021 and February–April 2023), resulting in 55,340 relevant tweets. Sentiment analysis was conducted to classify tweets into positive, negative, and neutral categories. In the second stage, the Delphi method was employed with 32 transportation experts who analyzed the extracted data and identified 13 critical issues in sustainable transportation. The issues were then ranked using a five-point Likert scale based on their importance.
Findings: The findings revealed that "high transportation costs" emerged as the most critical issue, with a mean score of 4.75 out of 5. "Air pollution" and "traffic congestion" were ranked second and third, with mean scores of 4.719 and 4.688, respectively. Other identified challenges included the high cost of fuel, lack of parking spaces, poor vehicle conditions, insufficient driver skills, and inadequate salaries for drivers. Sentiment analysis indicated significant negative sentiments towards environmental and economic factors, particularly costs and pollution, while social factors like driver behavior and vehicle cleanliness received mixed sentiments.
Conclusion: The study underscores the multifaceted challenges in achieving sustainable transportation, with economic factors like costs and environmental issues such as air pollution being the most pressing concerns. The results highlight the need for targeted policies, such as subsidies, technological advancements in green transportation, and public awareness campaigns, to address these issues effectively and promote sustainable urban mobility.
Downloads
References
Abedini Nazari, N., Adab, H., & Chahardoli, A. (2024). Designing a Model for the Integration of Physical, Informational, and Financial Processes in the Supply Chain to Achieve Resilience in the Automotive Industry. Dynamic Management and Business Analysis, 3(1), 192-204. https://doi.org/10.61838/dmbaj.3.1.11
Bouillass, G., Blanc, I., & Pérez‐López, P. (2021). Step-by-Step Social Life Cycle Assessment Framework: A Participatory Approach for the Identification and Prioritization of Impact Subcategories Applied to Mobility Scenarios. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 26(12), 2408-2435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01988-w
Chou, J.-R. (2017). A Fuzzy-Based Sustainability Assessment Approach for Promoting Sustainable Urban Mobility. https://doi.org/10.2991/icoi-17.2017.53
Farmaki, E., Aryblia, M., Tournaki, S., & Tsoutsos, T. (2021). Assessing Sustainable Urban Mobility Policies in the Mediterranean Tourism Destinations Through Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Models. 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73715-3_2
Gadžo, E. (2024). Sump Indicators in Focus – Investigating Modal Distribution in Urban Mobility Research. Put I Saobraćaj, 70(1), 19-22. https://doi.org/10.31075/pis.70.01.04
Gompf, K., Traverso, M., & Hetterich, J. (2021). Using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Introduce Weights to Social Life Cycle Assessment of Mobility Services. Sustainability, 13(3), 1258. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031258
Grande-Ayala, C. E. (2024). An Assessment of Accessibility From a Socially Sustainable Urban Mobility Approach in Mass Transit Projects: Contributions From the Northern Central American Triangle. Sustainability, 16(9), 3766. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093766
Huertas, J. I., Stöffler, S., Fernández, T., García, X., Castañeda, R., Serrano-Guevara, O. S., Mogro, A. E., & Alvarado, D. A. (2021). Methodology to Assess Sustainable Mobility in LATAM Cities. Applied Sciences, 11(20), 9592. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11209592
Kalakou, S., Spundflasch, S., Martins, S., & Diaz, A. (2021). SUMPs Implementation: Designation of Capacity Gaps of Local Authorities in the Delivery of Sustainable Mobility Projects. 239-258. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57764-3_16
Katar, I. (2022a). Fostering Pedestrian Ecomobility for Sustainable Urban Development: A Case Study, Riyadh City. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1306641/v1
Katar, I. (2022b). Promoting Pedestrian Ecomobility in Riyadh City for Sustainable Urban Development. Scientific reports, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-18183-y
Li, Q., & Samimi, C. (2023). Assessing Human Mobility and Its Climatic and Socioeconomic Factors for Sustainable Development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sustainability, 15(15), 11661. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511661
Liu, X., & Dijk, M. (2022). The Role of Data in Sustainability Assessment of Urban Mobility Policies. Data & Policy, 4. https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2021.32
López-Carreiro, I., Monzón, A., & López, E. (2023). MaaS Implications in the Smart City: A Multi-Stakeholder Approach. Sustainability, 15(14), 10832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410832
Marcarian, T., Obreja, V., Murray, K., Meltzer, J., & Miller, P. S. (2023). Success in Supporting Early Mobility and Exercise in a Cardiothoracic Intensive Care Unit. Jona the Journal of Nursing Administration, 53(3), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.1097/nna.0000000000001262
Nagy, S., & Csiszár, C. (2022). Assessment Methods for Comparing Shared Mobility and Conventional Transportation Modes in Urban Areas. Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences, 30(2), 158-166. https://doi.org/10.3311/ppso.16605
Ngossaha, J. M. (2024). Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility: A Multidimensional Ontology-Based Framework for Assessment and Consensus Decision-Making Using DS-AHP. Sustainability, 16(11), 4458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114458
Onat, N. C., Abdella, G. M., Küçükvar, M., Kutty, A. A., Al-Nuaimi, M., Kumbaroğlu, G., & Bulu, M. (2021). How Eco‐efficient Are Electric Vehicles Across Europe? A Regionalized Life Cycle Assessment‐based Eco‐efficiency Analysis. Sustainable Development, 29(5), 941-956. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2186
Rahman, M. H., Mouli, M. J., & Ashik, F. R. (2022). Assessment of Neighborhood Sustainability in Terms of Urban Mobility: A Case Study in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Geoscape, 16(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.2478/geosc-2022-0001
Shahmohamadi, N., Moeinzad, H., Mehrinejad, S., & Keramati, M. (2023). Presenting a Decision Support System Model based on the Analysis of Digital Supply Chain Management Risk Factors in the Country's Steel Industries. Dynamic Management and Business Analysis, 2(2), 128-139. https://doi.org/10.61838/dmbaj.2.2.10
Šoštarić, M., Vidović, K., Jakovljević, M., & Lale, O. (2021). Data-Driven Methodology for Sustainable Urban Mobility Assessment and Improvement. Sustainability, 13(13), 7162. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137162
Teran-Escobar, C. (2024). Understanding the Individual, Sociodemographic and Mobility-Related Factors Associated With Active and Sustainable Mobility: A Mixed-Methods Study. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5qw4p
Varshavi, R., Mohammad Porzarandi, M. E., & Hashemi, S. Z. (2024). Formulating a Suitable Strategy For a Car Parts Manufacturing Company (Case Study: Kosha Afarin Ideal Car Industries Company). Dynamic Management and Business Analysis, 2(4), 94-111. https://doi.org/10.22034/dmbaj.2024.2035823.1038
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Maryam Farahmand, Sajjad Shokoehyar, Neda Farahbakhsh (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.