Search results

This study aims to provide a meaningful comparison of airports’ performance and better understand the differences observed in the analysed airport performance by presenting a model to analyse the relationship between operational and financial performance and airport characteristics.

This study uses a quantitative analysis approach. The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and entropy weight were utilised to analyse 17 airports in three Airports Council International regions: Asia, Europe and North America. Through operational and financial factors, these sample airports identified the most efficiently operated airports from 2016 to 2019.

Overall, Asian airports were superior in operational and financial efficiency. Unlike operating performance, the sample airport’s financial and total performance results show a similar trend. There were no noticeable changes in operational factors. Therefore, differences in financial variables for each airport may affect the total performance.

This study provides insightful implications for airport policymakers to establish a standardised information disclosure foundation for consistent analysis and encourage airports to provide this information.

The adoption of Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortisation (EBITDA) to debt ratio and EBITDA per passenger, which had previously been underutilised in the previous study as financial factors, demonstrated differences between airports for airport stakeholders. In addition, the study presented a model that facilitates producing more intuitive results using TOPSIS, which was relatively underutilised compared to other methodologies such as date envelopment analysis.

Business research and development (R&D) is of critical importance for innovation and economic growth. The purpose of this study is to present an application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to select the most appropriate policy measure to support the business expenditure on R&D (BERD).

AHP method adopts a multi-criteria approach that can be used to analyse and prioritize the policy measures based on pairwise comparisons between several attributes that affect the selection of a policy tool. The model formulated in this study is applied to a real case of supporting decision-makers in some high-tech sectors in Iran.

The results highlight the four main financial policy measures implemented in Iran to enhance the BERD; those are, public procurement for R&D, direct subsidies for R&D, grants for R&D and income tax credit for firms have the priority values of 0.280, 0.260, 0.249 and 0.211, respectively.

The findings of this study are based on subjective evaluation of policy measures by experts of designing policy measures. Objective assessment of policy measures is important too because the preferences of policy interventions change during the time. Another significant point is that the priorities of specific policy measures depend on the effectiveness of their implementing arrangement and the previously successful experience of firms in receiving them.

This paper presents an application of the AHP to select the most appropriate policy measure to support the BERD. This method could be used to prioritize the policies and interventions that governments implement to solve different problems, especially at the innovation system level.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has gained significant momentum in recent years. Among AI-infused systems, one prominent application is context-aware systems. Although the fusion of AI and context awareness has given birth to personalized and timely AI-powered context-aware systems, several challenges still remain. Given the “black box” nature of AI, the authors propose that human–AI collaboration is essential for AI-powered context-aware services to eliminate uncertainty and evolve. To this end, this study aims to advance a research agenda for facilitators and outcomes of human–AI collaboration in AI-powered context-aware services.

Synthesizing the extant literature on AI and context awareness, the authors advance a theoretical framework that not only differentiates among the three phases of AI-powered context-aware services (i.e. context acquisition, context interpretation and context application) but also outlines plausible research directions for each stage.

The authors delve into the role of human–AI collaboration and derive future research questions from two directions, namely, the effects of AI-powered context-aware services design on human–AI collaboration and the impact of human–AI collaboration.

This study contributes to the extant literature by identifying knowledge gaps in human–AI collaboration for AI-powered context-aware services and putting forth research directions accordingly. In turn, their proposed framework yields actionable guidance for AI-powered context-aware service designers and practitioners.