Gogate, N G; Shelake, A G and Band, P (2024) Selection of most significant risk factors for Indian tunnel projects: An integrated fuzzy-based MCDM approach. International Journal of Construction Management, 24(2), pp. 161-176. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop a comprehensive fuzzy-based multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology to generate ranking of risk factors on Indian tunnel projects. The complexities and high costs involved in tunnelling projects create a strong necessity to look into quantitative risk assessment so as to prevent project underperformance. The analysis of large number of risk factors makes the task difficult. Thus, the present study attempts to address this challenge by developing a comprehensive framework for risk prioritization. In the previous work, critical risk factors (CRFs) were identified using Relative importance Index from the factor pool. The present study utilizes the Analytic Hierarchy Process approach for the identification of CRFs. The list of 25 critical factors, obtained by integrating both RII and AHP results, is further analyzed using the Fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (Fuzzy TOPSIS), based on three criteria, probability of occurrence, impact and cost. The methodology developed in this work will help in selecting the most significant risk factors, thus substantially improving the risk analysis process on Indian tunnel projects. This study contributes towards the development of framework for risk prioritization which will be useful for researchers and practitioners.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; fuzzy TOPSIS; Indian tunnel projects; multi-criteria-decision-making; risk prioritization; tunnel projects |
| Index terms: | tunnelling, analytical hierarchy process, risk factor, risk assessment, critical factor, fuzzy topsis, risk prioritization, complexity, preference, risk analysis, practitioner, methodology, decision-making, relative importance index, multi-criteria decision-making, tunnel |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, practitioner, decision-making and reasoning, research methods, civil engineering, financial risk, decision analysis, decision-making and optimization, infrastructure and transport systems, environmental hazards, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management |
| 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