Water Harvesting Research

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Publication Ethics

Self-Archiving Policy

Terms and conditions for submitting an article

Instructions for Authors

Forms and Templates

Risk Assessment of Water Structure Projects Using Fuzzy Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods: Fuzzy OWA and Fuzzy SAW (Case Study: S1 Wellhead Platform in the Salman Oil Field)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.

10.22077/jwhr.2025.8545.1161

Abstract

Civil engineering projects, including the construction of oil platforms, are inherently associated with various types of risks from different perspectives. Risk management in large-scale water and marine structure projects, such as the construction of oil platforms, is essential due to the multiple uncertainties and extensive environmental and human factors involved. Identifying, assessing, and prioritizing risks are critical steps in managing these projects effectively. This study aims to identify and rank key risks in the construction of an oil platform using fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making models. In this research, risks in the areas of engineering, execution, passive defense, and the environment were identified through a literature review and expert consultation using brainstorming techniques. Subsequently, a risk management team identified 21 key risks and established 8 evaluation criteria through focused group discussions. To achieve the research objectives, two questionnaires were developed. The first questionnaire was used to form a pairwise comparison matrix and determine the weights of the criteria using the Fuzzy Buckley method, while the second questionnaire assessed the importance of the risks. The collected data were analyzed using the Fuzzy Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) methods. The results indicated that the primary risks were related to the execution phase, highlighting the need for special attention to these risks to improve project outcomes. Unlike many traditional methods, the fuzzy OWA method effectively incorporates the subjective characteristics, risk appetite, and risk aversion of decision-makers, proving to be efficient in risk evaluation.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
Ali, S. I., Lalji, S. M., Ali, S. M., Zia, Y. K., Husain, N., Yousaf, N., Balobaid, A. S., Yahya, A., & Awan, Z. (2024). Risk ranking of rig up operation activities using multi-criteria decision-making methods based on fuzzy environment. Journal of Engineering Research, 12(1), 289-298.
Andrić, J. M., & Lu, D.-G. (2016). Risk assessment of bridges under multiple hazards in operation period. Safety science, 83, 80-92.
Ayoubi Ayoublu, S., Vafakhah, M., & Pourghasemi, H. (2022). Flood risk assessment using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Models (MCDM) and data mining methods (case study: Shiraz District 4). JWSS-Isfahan University of Technology, 26(3), 247-265.
Buckley, J. J. (1985). Ranking alternatives using fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy sets and systems, 15(1), 21-31.
Chapman, C., & Ward, S. (2003). Project risk management processes, techniques and insights. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Côté-Arsenault, D. (2013). Focus groups. In Routledge international handbook of qualitative nursing research (pp. 307-318). Routledge.
Dahab, M., Lee, Y., & Bogardi, I. (1994). A rule-based fuzzy-set approach to risk analysis of nitrate-contaminated groundwater. Water Science and Technology, 30(7), 45.
Dehdasht, G., Mohamad Zin, R., Ferwati, M. S., Mohammed Abdullahi, M. a., Keyvanfar, A., & McCaffer, R. (2017). DEMATEL-ANP risk assessment in oil and gas construction projects. Sustainability, 9(8), 1420.
Djenadic, S., Tanasijevic, M., Jovancic, P., Ignjatovic, D., Petrovic, D., & Bugaric, U. (2022). Risk evaluation: brief review and innovation model based on fuzzy logic and MCDM. Mathematics, 10(5), 811.
Hansson, K., Danielson, M., Ekenberg, L., & Buurman, J. (2013). Multiple criteria decision making for flood risk management. Integrated Catastrophe Risk Modeling: Supporting Policy Processes, 53-72.
Hansson, K., Larsson, A., Danielson, M., & Ekenberg, L. (2011). Coping with complex environmental and societal flood risk management decisions: an integrated multi-criteria framework. Sustainability, 3(9), 1357-1380.
Hopkin, P. (2018). Fundamentals of risk management: understanding, evaluating and implementing effective risk management. Kogan Page Publishers.
Kentel, E., & Aral, M. M. (2007). Fuzzy multiobjective decision-making approach for groundwater resources management. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 12(2), 206-217.
Khakzad, H. (2020). OWA operators with different Orness levels for sediment management alternative selection problem. Water Supply, 20(1), 173-185.
Kloman, F. (2010). A brief history of risk management. Enterprise risk management: Today’s leading research and best practices for tomorrow’s executives, 9-29.
Krueger, R. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage publications.
Levy, J. K. (2005). Multiple criteria decision making and decision support systems for flood risk management. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 19, 438-447.
Mellers, B. A., & Chang, S.-j. (1994). Representations of risk judgments. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 57(2), 167-184.
Mianabadi, H., Afshar, A., & Zarghami, M. (2011). Intelligent multi-stakeholder environmental management. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 862-866.
Mianji, A., Khamchin Moghaddam, F., & Bashi Azghadi, S. N. (2022). Prioritizing the risks of Oil Platforms Construction Using Fuzzy TOPSIS Decision-Making Method: A Case Study, oil platform P4. Human & Environment, 20(3), 299-311.
Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination. Charles Scribner.
Pohekar, S. D., & Ramachandran, M. (2004). Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—A review. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 8(4), 365-381.
Sadiq, R. (2003). Drilling waste discharges in the marine environment: a risk based decision methodology.
Stulz, R. M. (2008). Risk management failures: What are they and when do they happen? Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 20(4), 39-48.
Tabejamaat, S., Ahmadi, H., & Barmayehvar, B. (2024). Boosting large‐scale construction project risk management: Application of the impact of building information modeling, knowledge management, and sustainable practices for optimal productivity. Energy Science & Engineering, 12(5), 2284-2296.
Tian, D., Yang, B., Chen, J., & Zhao, Y. (2018). A multi-experts and multi-criteria risk assessment model for safety risks in oil and gas industry integrating risk attitudes. Knowledge-Based Systems, 156, 62-73.
Tsakalerou, M., Efthymiadis, D., & Abilez, A. (2022). An intelligent methodology for the use of multi-criteria decision analysis in impact assessment: The case of real-world offshore construction. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 15137.
Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Management science, 26(7), 641-658.
Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Transactions on systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18(1), 183-190.
Water Harvesting Research
Volume 7, Issue 2
September 2024
Pages 334-348
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics