IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i4p1404-d320529.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Reliability Analysis for Risk Ranking in a Levee Reconstruction Project

Author

Listed:
  • Meho Saša Kovačević

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Lovorka Librić

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Gordana Ivoš

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Anita Cerić

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

Abstract

Levees are embankments designed for passive flood protection. In order to reduce the potential of climate-induced flooding risks, it is necessary to reconstruct or upgrade the existing levees. Flood risk management aims to reduce the probability of floods and their potential adverse effects on the population, economy, and environment. This paper presents the novel application of reliability analysis for risk ranking in the Otok Virje-Brezje levee reconstruction project in the Republic of Croatia. To identify, verify and analyse key risks, a group of 35 experts, who were directly involved in the levee reconstruction project or have extensive experience in similar projects, was selected. An Analytic network process (ANP) was used for group multi criteria decision-making. Quantitative and qualitative approaches to risk analysis were combined. Different experts from the various organisations may have diverse interests and goals. The geometric mean method was chosen to reach group consensus. The resources that will be allocated to the risk responses are proportional to the risk exposures. To analyse the reliability of the group consensus-reaching method a determination of the risk ranking probability matrix is proposed by using the Monte Carlo simulation method. Different decision-making approaches are proposed for cases in which consensus is not reached with satisfactory reliability.

Suggested Citation

  • Meho Saša Kovačević & Lovorka Librić & Gordana Ivoš & Anita Cerić, 2020. "Application of Reliability Analysis for Risk Ranking in a Levee Reconstruction Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1404-:d:320529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1404/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1404/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "A peer-to-peer dynamic adaptive consensus reaching model for the group AHP decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 521-530.
    2. Anna Rita Scorzini & Maurizio Leopardi, 2017. "River basin planning: from qualitative to quantitative flood risk assessment: the case of Abruzzo Region (central Italy)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 88(1), pages 71-93, August.
    3. Nigel Arnell & Simon Gosling, 2016. "The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 387-401, February.
    4. Fu, Chao & Yang, Jian-Bo & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2015. "A group evidential reasoning approach based on expert reliability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 886-893.
    5. Frans Klijn & Heidi Kreibich & Hans Moel & Edmund Penning-Rowsell, 2015. "Adaptive flood risk management planning based on a comprehensive flood risk conceptualisation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 845-864, August.
    6. Zinde-Walsh, Victoria, 2017. "Kernel Estimation When Density May Not Exist: A Corrigendum," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(5), pages 1259-1263, October.
    7. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    8. Anna Kosovac & Brian Davidson & Hector Malano, 2019. "Are We Objective? A Study into the Effectiveness of Risk Measurement in the Water Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, February.
    9. Angilella, Silvia & Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto, 2010. "Non-additive robust ordinal regression: A multiple criteria decision model based on the Choquet integral," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 277-288, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hsiao-Ping Wei & Yuan-Fong Su & Chao-Tzuen Cheng & Keh-Chia Yeh, 2020. "Levee Overtopping Risk Assessment under Climate Change Scenario in Kao-Ping River, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Gabriel Castelblanco & Jose Guevara & Harrison Mesa & Diego Flores, 2020. "Risk Allocation in Unsolicited and Solicited Road Public-Private Partnerships: Sustainability and Management Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-28, June.

    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. Indira Pokhrel & Ajay Kalra & Md Mafuzur Rahaman & Ranjeet Thakali, 2020. "Forecasting of Future Flooding and Risk Assessment under CMIP6 Climate Projection in Neuse River, North Carolina," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-23, August.
    2. Xue, Min & Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2020. "Group consensus reaching based on a combination of expert weight and expert reliability," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    3. Min Xue & Chao Fu & Shan-Lin Yang, 2021. "Dynamic Expert Reliability Based Feedback Mechanism in Consensus Reaching Process with Distributed Preference Relations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 341-375, April.
    4. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    5. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    6. Philip Antwi-Agyei & Frank Baffour-Ata & Sarah Koomson & Nana Kwame Kyeretwie & Nana Barimah Nti & Afia Oforiwaa Owusu & Fukaiha Abdul Razak, 2023. "Drivers and coping mechanisms for floods: experiences of residents in urban Kumasi, Ghana," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 116(2), pages 2477-2500, March.
    7. Bushra Khalid & Bueh Cholaw & Débora Souza Alvim & Shumaila Javeed & Junaid Aziz Khan & Muhammad Asif Javed & Azmat Hayat Khan, 2018. "Riverine flood assessment in Jhang district in connection with ENSO and summer monsoon rainfall over Upper Indus Basin for 2010," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 92(2), pages 971-993, June.
    8. Nikolaos Argyris & Alec Morton & José Rui Figueira, 2014. "CUT: A Multicriteria Approach for Concavifiable Preferences," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 633-642, June.
    9. Sirirat Sae Lim & Hong Ngoc Nguyen & Chia-Li Lin, 2022. "Exploring the Development Strategies of Science Parks Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-29, April.
    10. Laura Devitt & Jeffrey Neal & Gemma Coxon & James Savage & Thorsten Wagener, 2023. "Flood hazard potential reveals global floodplain settlement patterns," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Gong, Zaiwu & Guo, Weiwei & Słowiński, Roman, 2021. "Transaction and interaction behavior-based consensus model and its application to optimal carbon emission reduction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    12. Shao Sun & Zunya Wang & Chuanye Hu & Ge Gao, 2021. "Understanding Climate Hazard Patterns and Urban Adaptation Measures in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-12, December.
    13. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    14. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    15. Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "From conventional group decision making to large-scale group decision making: What are the challenges and how to meet them in big data era? A state-of-the-art survey," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    16. Kuei-Hu Chang & Yung-Chia Chang & Kai Chain & Hsiang-Yu Chung, 2016. "Integrating Soft Set Theory and Fuzzy Linguistic Model to Evaluate the Performance of Training Simulation Systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-29, September.
    17. Gianpaolo Di Bona & Antonio Forcina & Domenico Falcone & Luca Silvestri, 2020. "Critical Risks Method (CRM): A New Safety Allocation Approach for a Critical Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Doumpos, Michael & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2011. "Preference disaggregation and statistical learning for multicriteria decision support: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(3), pages 203-214, March.
    19. Osberghaus, Daniel & Reif, Christiane, 2021. "How do different compensation schemes and loss experience affect insurance decisions? Experimental evidence from two independent and heterogeneous samples," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    20. Angela Connelly & Jeremy Carter & John Handley & Stephen Hincks, 2018. "Enhancing the Practical Utility of Risk Assessments in Climate Change Adaptation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-12, May.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1404-:d:320529. 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.