4.5 Article

A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages 220-231

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.02.002

Keywords

Risk assessment; Linguistics variables; Trapezoidal fuzzy numbers; Risk factor

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The increasing complexity and dynamism of construction projects have imposed substantial uncertainties and subjectivities in the risk analysis process. Most of the real-world risk analysis problems contain a mixture of quantitative and qualitative data; therefore quantitative risk assessment techniques are inadequate for prioritizing risks. This article presents a risk assessment methodology based on the Fuzzy Sets Theory, which is an effective tool to deal with subjective judgement, and on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (A HP), which is used to structure a large number of risks. The proposed methodology incorporates knowledge and experience acquired from many experts, since they carry out the risks identification and their structuring, and also the subjective judgements of the parameters which are considered to assess the overall risk factor: risk impact, risk probability and risk discrimination. All of these factors are expressed by qualitative scales which are defined by trapezoidal fuzzy numbers to capture the vagueness in the linguistic variables. The most notable differences with other fuzzy risk assessment methods are the use of an algorithm to handle the inconsistencies in the fuzzy preference relation when pair-wise comparison judgements are necessary, and the use of trapezoidal fuzzy numbers until the defuzzification step. An illustrative example on risk assessment of a rehabilitation project of a building is used to demonstrate the proposed methodology. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available