Eom, C S J and Paek, J H (2009) Risk index model for minimizing environmental disputes in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(1), pp. 34-41. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Although the number of environment-related disputes is increasing, no risk management approach exists to minimize such disputes at construction sites. The purpose of this study was to develop an environmental risk index model for general contractors to minimize third-party environmental disputes at construction sites. The analytic hierarchy process is used to weigh and calculate an environmental risk index. A case study demonstrated how to apply this model for risk evaluation, on-site monitoring, and environmental management, whereas a comparative analysis revealed that the model decreased the number of disputes to some degree at sites where it was used. This model makes it possible to minimize environmental disputes in the field effectively.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; dispute resolution; environmental issues; risk management; site evaluation |
| Index terms: | comparative analysis, general contractor, construction site, environmental issue, environmental risk, dispute, case study, environmental management, resolution, risk management, monitoring |
| Subjects: | conflict resolution, financial risk, sustainability assessment, data analysis and analytics, work location, dispute resolution, practitioner, control systems, environmental issues, data collection methods, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Cost Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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