Social risk analysis for mega construction projects based on structural equation model and bayesian network: A risk evolution perspective

Lu, Y; Liu, J and Yu, W (2024) Social risk analysis for mega construction projects based on structural equation model and bayesian network: A risk evolution perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(7), pp. 2604-2629. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: Mega construction projects (MCPs), which play an important role in the economy, society and environment of a country, have developed rapidly in recent years. However, due to frequent social conflicts caused by the negative social impact of MCPs, social risk control has become a major challenge. Exploring the relationship between social risk factors and social risk from the perspective of risk evolution and identifying key factors contribute to social risk control; but few studies have paid enough attention to this. Therefore, this study aims to systematically analyze the impact of social risk factors on social risk based on a social risk evolution path. Design/methodology/approach: This study proposed a social risk evolution path for MCPs explaining how social risk occurs and develops with the impact of social risk factors. To further analyze the impact quantitatively, a social risk analysis model combining structural equation model (SEM) with Bayesian network (BN) was developed. SEM was used to verify the relationship in the social risk evolution path. BN was applied to identify key social risk factors and predict the probabilities of social risk, quantitatively. The feasibility of the proposed model was verified by the case of water conservancy projects. Findings: The results show that negative impact on residents' living standards, public opinion advantage and emergency management ability were key social risk factors through sensitivity analysis. Then, scenario analysis simulated the risk probability results with the impact of different states of these key factors to obtain management strategies. Originality/value: This study creatively proposes a social risk evolution path describing the dynamic interaction of the social risk and first applies the hybrid SEM–BN method in the social risk analysis for MCPs to explore effective risk control strategies. This study can facilitate the understanding of social risk from the perspective of risk evolution and provide decision-making support for the government coping with social risk in the implementation of MCPs.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Bayesian network; mega construction projects; social risk analysis; social risk evolution; structural equation model
Index terms: society, sensitivity analysis, strategy, emergency management, construction project, evolution, decision-making, methodology, risk analysis, management strategy, bayesian network, scenario analysis, structural equation model, risk factor, coping, social impact, implementation, interaction
Subjects: policy studies, environmental science, contractual arrangements, production management, financial risk, management, research methods, communities and social development, behavioral psychology, environmental hazards, statistical analysis, probabilistic model, decision analysis, sociology
Topics: Procurement, Governance, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Digital Applications
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here