Shahata, K and Zayed, T (2016) Integrated risk-assessment framework for municipal infrastructure. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(1): 04015052, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Decision-makers frequently argue that municipal infrastructure is at risk. Given the current state of risk for infrastructure, municipalities face challenging decisions to plan the integrated repair/renewal of road, water, and sewer (RWS) networks. The research presented in this article identifies a methodology and framework that facilitates decision-making processes used during corridor rehabilitation project planning. A risk-based decision-making approach is developed to aid integrating repair/renewal of RWS assets. The risk model was developed using a mixed Delphi-Analytical Hierarchy Process approach. The impacts of four main consequences of failure with eighteen subfactors were considered. The RWS networks indices were amalgamated and grouped into an overall integrated risk index using K-means Clustering technique. Data provided by the City of Guelph was used in a case study in order to demonstrate the model features. Results show that pipe/road size and accessibility factors had the highest impact on the integrated risk index. The developed models can be used by researchers and practitioners (municipal engineers and consultants) to prioritize corridor rehabilitation projects thereby easing the challenge faced by stakeholders regarding the future of municipal infrastructure.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; corridor rehabilitation; decision-making; infrastructure; municipal; organizational issues; risk; road; sewer; water |
| Index terms: | decision-making, methodology, practitioner, rehabilitation project, repair, municipality, renewal, sewer, face, clustering, analytical hierarchy process, organizational issue, accessibility, case study, engineer, decision-making process |
| Subjects: | maintenance engineering, research methods, inclusive design, renovation and retrofit, administrative law, decision-making and optimization, infrastructure and transport systems, health conditions and diseases, decision analysis, practitioner, business, data collection methods, profession, data science, psychology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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