Urban road authorities in rapidly motorizing cities must allocate scarce maintenance budgets across competing segments under multi-criteria pressure. This study develops an objective, multi-expert, risk-informed prioritization model for the 36 national road segments of Bandung City, Indonesia, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with geometric-mean aggregation across a seven-expert panel drawn from government, academia, and practice. Five decision criteria are evaluated: International Roughness Index (IRI), Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT), Road Function, a composite Safety Risk (operationalized as the interaction of normalized IRI and AADT), and a length-based Rehabilitation Cost proxy. The aggregated pairwise-comparison matrix attains a Consistency Ratio of 0.036, a 58.6% improvement over the single-expert benchmark (0.087), confirming the methodological superiority of group-based AHP. The aggregated weights place Safety Risk first (0.467), followed by IRI (0.234), AADT (0.187), Cost (0.068), and Function (0.044). Applied through weighted-linear synthesis, the model identifies three Critical segments warranting immediate rehabilitation; their designation is robust across five sensitivity scenarios. A key analytical finding is that the most physically damaged segment (Bts. Cileunyi–Nagreg I, IRI = 8.0 m/km) ranks seventh because its lowest network AADT reduces composite risk exposure, demonstrating that risk-informed multi-criteria prioritization produces materially different rankings from condition-only approaches.
Malewa et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: