Deriving the Value of Time for Toll Revenue Forecasting using Multiple Criteria Decision-Making


  • Jeffrey Shelton Multi-Resolution Modeling Texas A&M Transportation Institute, El Paso, Texas
  • Alejandro Berlanga Research & Implementation- El Paso Texas A&M Transportation Institute, El Paso, Texas



Value of time, toll revenue forecasting, multiple criteria decision-making, multiple criteria decision-making, dynamic traffic assignment, simulation modeling


Mathematical traffic models replicate travel decisions and driver behavior. These tools have become more sophisticated, yet they remain simplified representations of more complex systems, including associated toll forecasts. A literature review shows that a substantial amount of toll revenue forecasts has fallen short of accurately representing actual road usage—by as much as 50%. In recent years, simulation-based modeling tools have emerged as an innovative approach to regional traffic forecasting. They capture time-varying traffic conditions and represent more realistic traffic flow and congestion, but this type of travel forecasting new and complex. One key variable in these traffic modeling tools is the value of time (VoT). The VoT represents how drivers perceive their willingness to pay a toll to reduce their travel time. How to properly quantify the VoT is still not completely understood, but it is the governing factor in how toll revenue forecasts are calculated. We propose three different approaches for quantifying the VoT. The first approach uses socio-economic data in terms of median income per zone. The VoT is quantified based on income levels of each origin-zone that travelers depart from. The second approach uses a traveler’s destination zone—derived based on trip purpose. The second approach uses a multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology known as the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to develop weighting for each trip purpose. A third approach also uses AHP (combined with departure time) to derive weights for each traveler’s VoT. The three approaches were tested using a simulation-based dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) model.


Klein, D., “The Voluntary Provision of Public Goods? The Turnpike Companies of Early America,” Economic Inquiry 28, pp 788 -794, October

Parkany, E., “Environmental Justice Issues Related to Transponder Ownership and Road Pricing,” Journal of the Transportation Research Record, Vol 1932, pp 97-108, Washington DC, 2005.

Bain, R., Credit Risk Analysis-Toll Road Traffic & Revenue Forecasts: An Interpreter’s Guide, First Edition, Publicaciones Digitales SA, Seville, 2009. ISSB: 978-0-9561527-1-8.

Li, Zheng, and David A. Hensher, “Toll Roads in Australia: An Overview of Characteristics and Accuracy of Demand Forecasts,” Transport Reviews 30 541-569, 2010.

Flyvbjerg, B., M.K.S. Holm, and S. Buhl, “Inaccuracy in Traffic Forecasts,” Transport Reviews 26(1) 1-24, 2006.

National Cooperative Highway Research Program, “Estimating Toll Road Demand and Revenue: A Synthesis of Highway Practice: Synthesis 364,” Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, pp 19-35, 2006.

Vassallo, J. M., A. Sánchez, “Subordinated Public Participation Loans for Financing Toll Highway Concessions in Spain,” Transportation Research Record 1996, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., pp 1-8, 2007.

Alasad, R., Dynamic Modelling of Demand Risk in PPP Infrastructure Projects: The Case of Toll Roads, Dissertation: Heriot-Watt University, School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure & Society; August 2015.

Bull, M., A. Mauchan, and L. Wilson, Toll-Road PPPs: Identifying, Mitigating and Managing Traffic Risk. Washington DC: homepage on Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility and the Global Infrastructure Facility (PPIAP), 2017. [Online]. Available:

Hensher, D., and P. Goodwin, “Using Values of Travel Time Savings for Toll Roads: Avoiding Some Common Errors,” Journal of Transport Policy, Vol 11 171-181, 2004.

Chiu, Y.C., J. Bottom, M. Mahut, A. Paz, R. Balakrishna, T. Waller, J. Hicks, Dynamic Traffic Assignment – A Primer, Transportation Research Circular E-C153, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, 2011.

Sloboden, J., V. Alexiadis, Y-C. Chiu, and E. Nava, Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume XIV: Guidebook on the Utilization of Dynamic Traffic Assignment. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 2012.

Hensher, David & Li, Zheng & Rose, John. (2013). Accommodating risk in the valuation of expected travel time savings. Journal of Advanced Transportation. 47. 10.1002/atr.160.

Li, Hao, H. Tu, D. A. Hensher, “Integrating the mean–variance and scheduling approaches to allow for schedule delay and trip time variability under uncertainty”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 89, 2016. Pages 151-163, ISSN 0965-8564,

Constantinos, A., E. Matsoukis, P. Roussi, A Methodology for the Estimation of Value-of-time Using State-of-the-Art Econometric Models, Journal of Public Transportation, Center for Urban Transportation Research, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2007.

Mishra, S., L. Tang, S. Ghader, Estimation and Valuation of Travel Time Reliability for Transportation Planning Applications, Case Studies on Transport Policy, Vol. 6. Issue 1, pp 51-62, 2018. ISSN 2213-624X,

Kono, T., A. Kishi, E. Seita & T. Yokoi, Limitations of using generalized transport costs to estimate changes in trip demand: a bias caused by the endogenous value of time, Transportametrica A: Transport Science, 14:3, 192-209, 2018.

Chiu, Y.C. and J.A. Villalobos, Incorporating Dynamic Traffic Assignment into Long-Range Transportation Planning with Daily Simulation Assignment and One-Norm Origin-Destination Calibration Formulation. Transportation Research Record Part A: Policy and Practice, 2009.

ArcGIS Pro (Version 2.5). Esri Inc., 2010.

Saaty, R.W., The Analytical Hierarchy Process—What it is and How it is Used, Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 9, No. 3-5 =, pp 161-176, Pergamon Journals Ltd, 1987.

Saaty, T.L., How to Make a Decision: The Analytical Hierarchy Process, INFORMS Vol. 24, No. 6, Dec. 1994, pp 19-43. JSTOR,

Forman, E., S. Gass, The Analytical Hierarchy Process – An Exposition, Operations Research, Vol 49, Issue 4, pp 469-627, 2001.

Alonso, J. A., M. T. Lamata, Consistency in the Analytical Hierarchy Process: A New Approach, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, Oct 2005.

Shelton, J., P.T. Martin, Determining Optimal Tolling Rates for Border Regions Using Dynamic Modeling Methods, American Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Vol. 4, No. 4, 2019, pp. 118-131. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtte.20190404.12




How to Cite

Shelton, J., & Berlanga, A. . (2022). Deriving the Value of Time for Toll Revenue Forecasting using Multiple Criteria Decision-Making. European Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(4), 821–839.