Advertisement

Analyzing Conflicts of Implementing High-Speed Railway Project in Central Asia Using Graph Model

  • Shawei HeEmail author
  • Ekaterina Flegentova
  • Bing Zhu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 315)

Abstract

Conflicts arise when the proposed construction of a high-speed railway project in Central Asia affects the interests of Central Asian nations located along the route. By considering the national governments in Central Asia as decision makers, their possible actions in dealing with the conflicts are analyzed by using the graph model, a conflict resolution methodology. Three criteria, geological locations, political relations, and environmental concerns, are taken into account to accurately determine the preferences of these nations. The stabilities and equilibria of the model are calculated to provide potential strategic resolutions for these nations. The equilibrium that can take place in reality indicates that Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan can support a modified project. The opposition from Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan calls for appropriate resolutions from China in order to secure the successful implementation of the project.

Keywords

High-speed railway Central asia Graph model Conflict resolution 

References

  1. Arina, M.: Chinese Silk Road to be Held by Railways of Central Asia (In Russian). Russian Institute of Strategic Studies (2016). https://riss.ru/analitycs/27356/. Last accessed 20 Dec 2017
  2. Belton, V., Stewart, T.: Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. International 142(6), 192–202 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. Brans, J.P., Mareschal, B.: Promethee methods. In: Greco, S. (ed.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. ISOR, vol. 78, pp. 163–186. Springer, New York (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23081-5_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bristow, M., Hipel, K., Fang, L.: Ordinal preferences construction for multiple-objective multiple-participant conflicts. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 2418–2423. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  5. Fang, L., Hipel, K., Kilgour, M.: Interactive Decision Making: The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution, vol. 3. Wiley, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  6. Fang, L., Hipel, K., Kilgour, M., Peng, X.: A decision support system for interactive decision making-Part I: model formulation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 33(1), 42–55 (2003a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fang, L., Hipel, K., Kilgour, M., Peng, X.: A decision support system for interactive decision making - part II: analysis and output interpretation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 33(1), 56–66 (2003b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fraser, N., Hipel, K.: Solving complex conflicts. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 9(12), 805–816 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fraser, N., Hipel, K.: Conflict Analysis: Models and Resolutions. Series 9, vol. 11. North-Holland, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  10. Grabisch, M., Labreuche, C.: Fuzzy measures and integrals in MCDA. In: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 78, pp. 563–604. Springer, New York (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23081-5_14
  11. He, H.: Key challenges and countermeasures with railway accessibility along the Silk Road. Engineering 2(3), 288–291 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hipel, K., Fang, L.: Multiple participant decision making in societal and technological systems. In: Systems and Human Science, for Safety, Security, and Dependability: Selected Papers of the 1st International Symposium SSR 2003, Osaka, Japan, November 2003, p. 1. Elsevier (2005)Google Scholar
  13. Howard, N.: Paradoxes of Rationality: Theory of Metagames and Political Behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge (1971)Google Scholar
  14. Ke, Y.: Preference elicitation in the graph model for conflict resolution. Master's thesis, University of Waterloo (2008)Google Scholar
  15. Keeney, R., Raiffa, H., Rajala, D.: Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 45(9), 1093–1094 (1994)Google Scholar
  16. Kilgour, M., Hipel, K.: The graph model for conflict resolution: past, present, and future. Group Decis. Negot. 14(6), 441–460 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu, S., Lin, Y.: Introduction to grey systems theory. Underst. Complex Syst. 68(2), 1–18 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. Mccray, T.R.: Enviro-economic imperatives and agricultural production in Uzbekistan: modern responses to emergent water management problems. Dissertation Abstracts Int. 59 (1999)Google Scholar
  19. Micklin, P., Aladin, N.: Reclaiming the Aral Sea. Sci. Am. 298(4), 64–71 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nandalal, K., Hipel, K.: Strategic decision support for resolving conflict over water sharing among countries along the Syr Darya River in the Aral Sea Basin. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 133(4), 289–299 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nash, J.: Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 36(1), 48–49 (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nash, J.: Non-cooperative games. Ann. Math. 54(2), 286–295 (1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neumann, V., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 1st edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1944)Google Scholar
  24. Kinsara, R., Petersons, O., Hipel, K., Kilgour, M.: Advanced decision support for the graph model for conflict resolution. J. Decis. Syst. 24(2), 117–145 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saaty, T.L.: Analytic Hierarchy Process. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. Wiley, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Savi, K., Peremen, M.: Trade Development in the CAREC Region: the Potential of Central Asian Railways (In Russian) (2017). http://mirperemen.net/2017/05/razvitie-torgovli-v-regione-cares-potencial-zheleznyx-dorog-centralnoj-azii/. Last accessed 12 Dec 2017
  27. Tabyldy, K.: Where Will the Silk Road Lead? (In Russian), Sputnik (2017). https://ru.sputnik.kg/analytics/20170116/1031299276/kuda-privedet-shelkovyj-put.html. Last accessed 12 Dec 2017
  28. UN DESA: World population prospects, the 2017 Revision, Volume I: comprehensive tables. New York United Nations Department of Economic & Social Affairs (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Economics and ManagementNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations