IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i6p2715-d1615412.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Occupational Risk Using Multi-Criteria Fuzzy AHP Methodology in a University Laboratory

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Storch de Almeida Calixto

    (Department of Production Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Paraná 84017-220, Brazil)

  • Ariel Orlei Michaloski

    (Department of Production Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Paraná 84017-220, Brazil)

Abstract

Academic laboratories operate in diverse fields. However, they expose individuals to occupational risks. To ensure social and economic sustainability, organizations must assess these risks. Accident prevention reduces injuries and financial losses. This study aims to structure an occupational risk assessment process in a university chemical laboratory in Brazil using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP). The methodology consists of identifying risks and applying the FAHP with linguistic variables to evaluate and prioritize them. Fifteen hazard sources were identified. In the risk assessment phase, the “Chemical Risk” criterion was given the highest priority, accounting for 54%, followed by “Accident Risk” at 26%, “Physical Risk” at 13%, and “Ergonomic risk” at 7%. This study contributes to applying a novel scientific method that enables low-cost risk assessment, reducing the need for significant investments in technology or specialized consultancy services. Furthermore, the research suggests applying this technique to different economic sectors, broadening the applicability of FAHP in occupational risk assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Storch de Almeida Calixto & Ariel Orlei Michaloski, 2025. "Assessment of Occupational Risk Using Multi-Criteria Fuzzy AHP Methodology in a University Laboratory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-21, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2715-:d:1615412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2715/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2715/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xin Ruan & Zhiyi Yin & Dan M. Frangopol, 2015. "Risk Matrix Integrating Risk Attitudes Based on Utility Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(8), pages 1437-1447, August.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    3. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    4. Ali Anjomshoae & Adnan Hassan & Kuan Yew Wong, 2019. "An integrated AHP-based scheme for performance measurement in humanitarian supply chains," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 68(5), pages 938-957, March.
    5. Daniel Onuț Badea & Doru Costin Darabont & Iulian Ivan & Vicențiu Ciocîrlea & Raluca Aurora Stepa & Oana Roxana Chivu, 2024. "Workers’ Exposure to Chemical Risk in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Assessment Methodology and Field Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Ho, William, 2008. "Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 211-228, April.
    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. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    3. Villacreses, Geovanna & Gaona, Gabriel & Martínez-Gómez, Javier & Jijón, Diego Juan, 2017. "Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: The case of continental Ecuador," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 275-286.
    4. Wang, Xiaojun & Chan, Hing Kai & Li, Dong, 2015. "A case study of an integrated fuzzy methodology for green product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 212-223.
    5. 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.
    6. Aniruddh Nain & Deepika Jain & Shivam Gupta & Ashwani Kumar, 2023. "Improving First Responders' Effectiveness in Post-Disaster Scenarios Through a Hybrid Framework for Damage Assessment and Prioritization," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(3), pages 409-437, September.
    7. Caprioli, Caterina & Bottero, Marta, 2021. "Addressing complex challenges in transformations and planning: A fuzzy spatial multicriteria analysis for identifying suitable locations for urban infrastructures," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Kao, Ling-Jing & Chiu, Chih-Chou & Lin, Hung-Tse & Hung, Yun-Wei & Lu, Cheng-Chin, 2024. "Unveiling the dimensions of digital transformation: A comprehensive taxonomy and assessment model for business," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Paweł Karczmarek & Witold Pedrycz & Adam Kiersztyn, 2021. "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Graphical Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 463-481, April.
    10. Ediz Atmaca & Esra Aktaş & Hafsa Nur Öztürk, 2023. "Evaluated Post-Disaster and Emergency Assembly Areas Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques: A Case Study of Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-26, May.
    11. Joanna Staszewska & Lilla Knop, 2025. "Identifying Resilience Factors of Power Company Business Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-35, February.
    12. Ahi, Payman & Searcy, Cory & Jaber, Mohamad Y., 2018. "A Quantitative Approach for Assessing Sustainability Performance of Corporations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 336-346.
    13. M. M. Yagoub & Aishah A. Alsereidi & Elfadil A. Mohamed & Punitha Periyasamy & Reem Alameri & Salama Aldarmaki & Yaqein Alhashmi, 2020. "Newspapers as a validation proxy for GIS modeling in Fujairah, United Arab Emirates: identifying flood-prone areas," 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. 104(1), pages 111-141, October.
    14. Kurek, Katarzyna A. & Heijman, Wim & van Ophem, Johan & Gędek, Stanisław & Strojny, Jacek, 2020. "The impact of geothermal resources on the competitiveness of municipalities: evidence from Poland," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1230-1239.
    15. Ireneusz Laks & Zbigniew Walczak, 2020. "Efficiency of Polder Modernization for Flood Protection. Case Study of Golina Polder (Poland)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-27, September.
    16. PrasannaVenkatesan, S. & Goh, M., 2016. "Multi-objective supplier selection and order allocation under disruption risk," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 124-142.
    17. Bui, Nuong Thi & Kawamura, Akira & Kim, Kyoung Woong & Prathumratana, Lunchakorn & Kim, Tae-Heok & Yoon, Suk-Ho & Jang, Min & Amaguchi, Hideo & Bui, Duong Du & Truong, Ngoc Tu, 2017. "Proposal of an indicator-based sustainability assessment framework for the mining sector of APEC economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 405-417.
    18. Kamvysi, Konstantina & Gotzamani, Katerina & Andronikidis, Andreas & Georgiou, Andreas C., 2014. "Capturing and prioritizing students’ requirements for course design by embedding Fuzzy-AHP and linear programming in QFD," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(3), pages 1083-1094.
    19. S Taghipour & D Banjevic & A K S Jardine, 2011. "Prioritization of medical equipment for maintenance decisions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1666-1687, September.
    20. Boris Prevolšek & Maja Borlinič Gačnik & Črtomir Rozman, 2023. "Applying Integrated Data Envelopment Analysis and Analytic Hierarchy Process to Measuring the Efficiency of Tourist Farms: The Case of Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, February.

    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:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2715-:d:1615412. 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.