IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hin/complx/5453184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Analysis of Emergency Based on Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojiao Qiao
  • Dan Shi

Abstract

Risk analysis of emergency is vital to effective emergency management. However, conventional analysis is challenged by the emerging problems as risk of emergency appearing increasingly complicated. The risk attributes of emergency originate in complicated sources, and their information is always incomplete. To ensure the efficiency and stability of emergency risk analysis, we proposed an elaborative approach composed of structural description framework and fuzzy evidential reasoning. Firstly, the risk attributes are identified by structural description framework. The information as evidence is obtained and normalized for further analysis. Secondly, risk analysis model with fuzzy evidential reasoning is constructed, and risk grade is evaluated. Finally, a certain railway project accident is taken as an example to test the model and some managerial insights are demonstrated. An approach combining structural description framework and fuzzy evidential reasoning model is feasible and effective; furthermore, it provides stable support for emergency risk analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojiao Qiao & Dan Shi, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Emergency Based on Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-10, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:hin:complx:5453184
    DOI: 10.1155/2019/5453184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2019/5453184.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2019/5453184.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2019/5453184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guikema, Seth D., 2009. "Natural disaster risk analysis for critical infrastructure systems: An approach based on statistical learning theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(4), pages 855-860.
    2. Zhiying Wang & Xiaodi Liu & Shitao Zhang, 2019. "A New Decision Method for Public Opinion Crisis with the Intervention of Risk Perception of the Public," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-14, July.
    3. Xiaodi Liu & Zengwen Wang & Shitao Zhang, 2018. "A New Methodology for Hesitant Fuzzy Emergency Decision Making with Unknown Weight Information," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-12, November.
    4. Mieko Kumasaki & Malcolm King & Mitsuru Arai & Lili Yang, 2016. "Anatomy of cascading natural disasters in Japan: main modes and linkages," 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. 80(3), pages 1425-1441, February.
    5. Peijia Ren & Zeshui Xu & Jing Gu, 2016. "Assessments of the Effectiveness of an Earthquake Emergency Plan Implementation with Hesitant Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1367-1389, November.
    6. Dong-Ling Xu, 2012. "An introduction and survey of the evidential reasoning approach for multiple criteria decision analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 163-187, May.
    7. Bañuls, Victor A. & Turoff, Murray & Hiltz, Starr Roxanne, 2013. "Collaborative scenario modeling in emergency management through cross-impact," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(9), pages 1756-1774.
    8. Yang, Jian-Bo, 2001. "Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 31-61, May.
    9. Guilan Kong & Lili Jiang & Xiaofeng Yin & Tianbing Wang & Dong-Ling Xu & Jian-Bo Yang & Yonghua Hu, 2018. "Combining principal component analysis and the evidential reasoning approach for healthcare quality assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 679-699, December.
    10. Argyris, Nikolaos & French, Simon, 2017. "Nuclear emergency decision support: A behavioural OR perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(1), pages 180-193.
    11. Zhang, Y. & Weng, W.G. & Huang, Z.L., 2018. "A scenario-based model for earthquake emergency management effectiveness evaluation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 197-207.
    12. Galindo, Gina & Batta, Rajan, 2013. "Review of recent developments in OR/MS research in disaster operations management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 201-211.
    13. Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2006. "Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1885-1913, November.
    14. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Niki Matinrad, 2016. "Disaster Management from a POM Perspective: Mapping a New Domain," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(10), pages 1611-1637, October.
    15. Yang, J.B. & Wang, Y.M. & Xu, D.L. & Chin, K.S., 2006. "The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 309-343, May.
    16. Chang, Mei-Shiang & Tseng, Ya-Ling & Chen, Jing-Wen, 2007. "A scenario planning approach for the flood emergency logistics preparation problem under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 737-754, November.
    17. Tam Vu & Ilan Noy, 2015. "Regional effects of natural disasters in China: investing in post-disaster recovery," 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. 75(2), pages 111-126, February.
    18. Mieko Kumasaki & Malcolm King & Mitsuru Arai & Lili Yang, 2016. "Anatomy of cascading natural disasters in Japan: main modes and linkages," 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. 80(3), pages 1425-1441, February.
    19. Michel Setbon & Jocelyn Raude & Claude Fischler & Antoine Flahault, 2005. "Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France: Determinants and Consequences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 813-826, August.
    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. Zhang, Y. & Weng, W.G. & Huang, Z.L., 2018. "A scenario-based model for earthquake emergency management effectiveness evaluation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 197-207.
    2. 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.
    3. Zhiying Wang & Xiaodi Liu & Shitao Zhang, 2019. "A New Decision Method for Public Opinion Crisis with the Intervention of Risk Perception of the Public," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-14, July.
    4. Chao Fu & Dong-Ling Xu, 2016. "Determining attribute weights to improve solution reliability and its application to selecting leading industries," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 401-426, October.
    5. J-B Yang & D-L Xu & X Xie & A K Maddulapalli, 2011. "Multicriteria evidential reasoning decision modelling and analysis—prioritizing voices of customer," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1638-1654, September.
    6. Abhishek Behl & Pankaj Dutta, 2019. "Humanitarian supply chain management: a thematic literature review and future directions of research," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1001-1044, December.
    7. Chao Fu & Weiyong Liu & Wenjun Chang, 2020. "Data-driven multiple criteria decision making for diagnosis of thyroid cancer," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 833-862, October.
    8. Guo, Min & Yang, Jian-Bo & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Wang, Hongwei, 2007. "Evidential reasoning based preference programming for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(3), pages 1294-1312, November.
    9. Guilan Kong & Lili Jiang & Xiaofeng Yin & Tianbing Wang & Dong-Ling Xu & Jian-Bo Yang & Yonghua Hu, 2018. "Combining principal component analysis and the evidential reasoning approach for healthcare quality assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 679-699, December.
    10. Kundu, Tanmoy & Sheu, Jiuh-Biing & Kuo, Hsin-Tsz, 2022. "Emergency logistics management—Review and propositions for future research," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    12. Maddulapalli, Anil Kumar & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2012. "Estimation, modeling, and aggregation of missing survey data for prioritizing customer voices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 762-776.
    13. Chao Fu & Min Xue & Wenjun Chang, 2022. "Multiple criteria decision making with reliability of assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(1), pages 121-157, May.
    14. Shahryar Monghasemi & Mohammad Reza Nikoo & Mohammad Ali Khaksar Fasaee & Jan Adamowski, 2017. "A Hybrid of Genetic Algorithm and Evidential Reasoning for Optimal Design of Project Scheduling: A Systematic Negotiation Framework for Multiple Decision-Makers," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 389-420, March.
    15. Sabbaghtorkan, Monir & Batta, Rajan & He, Qing, 2020. "Prepositioning of assets and supplies in disaster operations management: Review and research gap identification," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(1), pages 1-19.
    16. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2010. "The group consensus based evidential reasoning approach for multiple attributive group decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(3), pages 601-608, November.
    17. Zhang, Mei-Jing & Wang, Ying-Ming & Li, Ling-Hui & Chen, Sheng-Qun, 2017. "A general evidential reasoning algorithm for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(3), pages 1005-1015.
    18. Liu, Jiapeng & Liao, Xiuwu & Yang, Jian-bo, 2015. "A group decision-making approach based on evidential reasoning for multiple criteria sorting problem with uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 858-873.
    19. Lu, Chung-Cheng & Ying, Kuo-Ching & Chen, Hui-Ju, 2016. "Real-time relief distribution in the aftermath of disasters – A rolling horizon approach," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-20.
    20. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shanlin, 2012. "An evidential reasoning based consensus model for multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with interval-valued group consensus requirements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 167-176.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hin:complx:5453184. 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: Mohamed Abdelhakeem (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.hindawi.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.