Tran, T X M; Malano, H M and Thompson, R G (2003) Application of the analytic hierarchy process to prioritise irrigation asset renewals: The case of the la khe irrigation scheme, Vietnam. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10(6), pp. 382-390. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
In recent years, many organisations responsible for economic infrastructure have developed asset management systems to improve the financial and service performance of their facilities. Asset management is an integrated approach to improving the ability of an irrigation system to deliver water at a defined level of service in the most cost-effective manner. This paper describes how the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is applied to identify priorities for asset renewals in the La Khe irrigation scheme in North Vietnam. The AHP methodology was coupled with the expected maximum utility (EMU) to evaluate renewal priorities of assets grouped by types and by location within the hydraulic system.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; assets management; irrigation works; Vietnam |
| Index terms: | analytical hierarchy process, level of service, hydraulic, renewal, methodology, asset management, Vietnam, integrated approach |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, renovation and retrofit, research methods, Geography, asset management, decision-making and optimization, contractual arrangements, fluid mechanics |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| 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