IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i2p301-d1569865.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Industrial Occupational Safety Risks and Selection of Optimum Intervention Strategies: Fuzzy MCDM Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Gülay Demir

    (High School of Health Vocational Services, Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas 58140, Türkiye)

  • Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Sichuan College of Architectural Technology, Deyang 618000, China)

  • Ibrahim Badi

    (School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Libyan Academy, Misrata 2449, Libya)

  • Željko Stević

    (Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, University of East Sarajevo, Doboj 74000, Bosnia and Herzegovina
    School of Industrial Management Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea)

  • Dillip Kumar Das

    (Sustainable Transportation Research Group, Civil Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Kwazulu Natal, Durban 4041, South Africa)

Abstract

Over 1.1 million deaths occur annually from workplace injuries and diseases, with higher risks in developing countries. Occupational safety studies commonly use quantitative or qualitative methods, but these often fail to address uncertainty. This research targets the Libyan Steel Company (LISCO), aiming to analyze safety risks and develop a structured approach to identify optimal risk mitigation strategies. To this end, the Fuzzy Weights by ENvelope and SLOpe (F-WENSLO) method was chosen to determine the weights of three main safety risks and a total of 18 sub-risks belonging to them, and the fuzzy Bonferroni mean aggregation operator is applied to synthesize expert opinions. The Fuzzy Alternative Ranking Technique based on Adaptive Standardized Intervals (F-ARTASI) method was used to identify and rank the most appropriate safety interventions. While the primary risks identified under the main criteria and sub-criteria are occupational diseases and noise-induced diseases, with weights of 0.4737 and 0.1313, respectively, the intervention strategy deemed most effective for enhancing occupational safety is behavioral safety programs, which hold a weight of 11.0341. The sensitivity test of the analysis results reveals that although the criteria weights and the parameters used in the analysis vary under various scenarios, the ranking of the alternatives remains consistent. Since the general ranking of the alternatives is the same in other methods, decision makers will reach similar results no matter which method they use. This shows that a flexible and reliable decision-making approach is adopted in the process of optimizing occupational safety risks. This research emphasizes the critical importance of prioritizing occupational diseases and natural hazards in the formulation of occupational safety strategies and thus aims to contribute to the protection of workers in industrial plants such as LISCO.

Suggested Citation

  • Gülay Demir & Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima & Ibrahim Badi & Željko Stević & Dillip Kumar Das, 2025. "Identification of Industrial Occupational Safety Risks and Selection of Optimum Intervention Strategies: Fuzzy MCDM Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-28, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:2:p:301-:d:1569865
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/2/301/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/2/301/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Morteza Yazdani & Pascale Zaraté & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems," Post-Print hal-02879091, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jameel, Toqeer & Riaz, Muhammad & Aslam, Muhammad & Pamucar, Dragan, 2024. "Sustainable renewable energy systems with entropy based step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis and combined compromise solution," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    2. Nitasha Hasteer & Rahul Sindhwani & Abhishek Behl & Akul Varshney & Adityansh Sharma, 2024. "Exploring the inhibitors for competitive AI software development through cloud driven transformation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(1), pages 355-397, November.
    3. Željko Stević & Dillip Kumar Das & Rade Tešić & Marijo Vidas & Dragan Vojinović, 2022. "Objective Criticism and Negative Conclusions on Using the Fuzzy SWARA Method in Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Sood, Kirti & Singh, Simarjeet & Behl, Abhishek & Sindhwani, Rahul & Kaur, Sandeepa & Pereira, Vijay, 2023. "Identification and prioritization of the risks in the mass adoption of artificial intelligence-driven stable coins: The quest for optimal resource utilization," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Raghunathan Krishankumar & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur Soundarapandian Ravichandran, 2023. "A Novel Integrated q-Rung Fuzzy Framework for Biomass Location Selection with No Apriori Weight Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "A Hesitant Fuzzy Combined Compromise Solution Framework-Based on Discrimination Measure for Ranking Sustainable Third-Party Reverse Logistic Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    7. Nadine Kafa & Anicia Jaegler & Joseph Sarkis, 2020. "Harnessing Corporate Sustainability Decision-Making Complexity: A Field Study of Complementary Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-23, December.
    8. Thi Kim Lien Nguyen & Hoang Nga Le & Bach Dang Ha & Quoc Ngu Nguyen & Van Phi Pham & Van Dan Dinh, 2024. "Evaluating the Business Performance of Seaport Enterprises in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Torkayesh, Ali Ebadi & Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Torkayesh, Sajjad Ebadi & Lund, Peter D., 2022. "A comparative assessment of air quality across European countries using an integrated decision support model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. Sindhwani, Rahul & Afridi, Shayan & Kumar, Anil & Banaitis, Audrius & Luthra, Sunil & Singh, Punj Lata, 2022. "Can industry 5.0 revolutionize the wave of resilience and social value creation? A multi-criteria framework to analyze enablers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Manoj A. Palsodkar & Parth P. Koltharkar, 2024. "Nexus Effect of Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy Practices in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 3215-3244, December.
    12. Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha & Jalil Heidary-Dahooie & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė & Kannan Govindan, 2022. "A new dynamic multi-attribute decision making method based on Markov chain and linear assignment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 159-191, August.
    13. Vlahović, Olivera & Stanovcic, Tatjana & Perović, Djurdjica & Manojlović, Mileva & Radjenović, Žarko, 2025. "Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Travel and Tourism Digitalization: Web-Based Perspective," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2024), Hybrid Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Hybrid Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 5-7 September, 2024, pages 255-269, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    14. Tanrıverdi, Gökhan & Merkert, Rico & Karamaşa, Çağlar & Asker, Veysi, 2023. "Using multi-criteria performance measurement models to evaluate the financial, operational and environmental sustainability of airlines," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Miguel Ortíz-Barrios & Natalia Jaramillo-Rueda & Muhammet Gul & Melih Yucesan & Genett Jiménez-Delgado & Juan-José Alfaro-Saíz, 2023. "A Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Approach for Assessing the Emergency Department Performance during the COVID-19 Outbreak," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-39, March.
    16. Özcan Işık & Mohsin Shabir & Gülay Demir & Adis Puska & Dragan Pamucar, 2025. "A hybrid framework for assessing Pakistani commercial bank performance using multi-criteria decision-making," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 11(1), pages 1-35, December.
    17. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Jalaladdin & Amiri, Maghsoud & Mostafaeipour, Ali & Le, Ttu, 2024. "Integrating blockchain and strategic alliance in renewable energy supply chain toward sustainability: A comparative decision framework under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    18. Željko Stević & Nikola Brković, 2020. "A Novel Integrated FUCOM-MARCOS Model for Evaluation of Human Resources in a Transport Company," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-14, February.
    19. Abduallah Gamal & Mohamed Abdel-Basset & Ibrahim M. Hezam & Karam M. Sallam & Ibrahim A. Hameed, 2023. "An Interactive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Autonomous Vehicles and Distributed Resources Based on Logistic Systems: Challenges for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    20. Dariusz Kacprzak, 2024. "A new extension of the EDAS method in a fuzzy environment for group decision-making," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 51(3), pages 263-277, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:2:p:301-:d:1569865. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.