What is fair? Balancing performance metrics for multiple stakeholders in disruptions and reduced service capacity

Reduced capacity to operate services presents significant challenges for infrastructure management during disruptions and maintenance. Dispositions and procedures minimizing inconvenience for passengers or operators may not guarantee – or even hinder - the equitable treatment of all the stakeholders. A central issue is balancing stakeholder objectives and equity, both quantifiable in multiple ways and leading to the “ What is fair? ” question. Furthermore, accounting for different stakeholder roles and multiple solutions can complicate decision-making. This paper addresses this topic with three main contributions. First, a comprehensive numerical analysis of various stakeholder and system-level indicators is conducted on solutions for a realistic railway disruption scenario, to evaluate potential conflicts and address uncertainty in indicator choice. A new co-variations plot is introduced to visualize key quantitative trade-offs and guide decision-making. Second, a model is proposed to compute timetables minimizing inconvenience and manage reduced capacity. The model supports various recovery actions, passenger routing, service deviations, and cancellations. Its choice-based formulation enhances applicability in operations. Third, approaches are developed to reduce inequity without Pareto Inefficient outcomes. Results demonstrate that a balance between performance and equity is achievable, and inequity indicators often align. This research shows how emerging correlations and variabilities can ease the handling of multiple objectives and the identification of effective solutions, ultimately providing a framework for more equitable and efficient disruption management in transportation.