Zeng, J; An, M; Chan, A H C and Lin, Y (2004) A methodology for assessing risks in the construction process. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Construction projects are fraught with uncertainties and risks in their nature. The involvement of subjectivity and the absence of complete and precise information have seriously undermined the applicability of traditional modelling techniques, such as statistical and probabilistic method, which form the basis of many risk analysis approaches currently employed in the UK. On the other hand, fuzzy set theory was developed to enable ill-defined and complex problems to be modelled mathematically. However, previous studies to the use of fuzzy logic within the construction industry have proved to be either too simplistic or too specific in their applications. This paper investigates the core issues and current development of risk modelling and assessment in the construction process. A new risk assessment model based on fuzzy set theory is presented in order to tackle construction risks more effectively and efficiently. An illustrative example is included to demonstrate the proposed methodology.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction process; fuzzy set theory; risk assessment |
| Index terms: | fuzzy logic, subjectivity, fuzzy set theory, risk assessment, construction project, construction process, methodology, risk analysis, modelling, construction industry |
| Subjects: | human factors and perception, data science, analytical methods, research methods, production management, financial risk, building construction, industry analysis, decision-making and optimization, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Site 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