Skip to main content
Log in

An aggregative fuzzy risk analysis for flood incident management

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mitigation of loss or damage is the prime focus in flood incident management (FIM). Emergency response program, a key element in flood incident management can fail in multiple ways; however it can be mainly attributed to failure of infrastructure and/or failure of human institutions. Characterization and quantification of various risk factors in emergency response is a difficult task because responses to floods are complex and dynamic in nature. For these reasons, high level of uncertainties are inherent in the estimation of risk associated with the emergency response and may warrant the usage of a quantitative–qualitative risk assessment framework. In this paper, a multi-stage hierarchical model is developed to estimate the aggregative risk associated with the failure of emergency response system in case of flood. Each risk item is defined by the product of the likelihood of a failure event and associated consequences. Both likelihood and the consequences of a failure event are defined using fuzzy numbers to capture vagueness in the concept of relevant risk factors. An analytic hierarchy process is used for estimating the priority matrix (weights) for grouping risk attributes. Utility of a proposed model is demonstrated through a simplified risk hierarchy representing emergency response system failure of a FIM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • EA (2007) Risk assessment for flood incident management: risks and consequences of failure of reactive mitigation measures, R&D Technical Report SC050028/SR4. Environmental Agency, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer L, Flikweert J, Hoogendoorn D, Ligthart N (2011) Residual risk revisited––flood incident management in the Netherlands. Available online at: http://kreeft.zeeland.nl/zeesterdoc/ZBI-O/ZEE/ZEE0/8001/800117_1.pdf. Accessed on 23 March 2011

  • HR Wallingford FIM FRAME (2011) Flood incident management––a FRAME work for improvement. Available online at: http://www.fimframe.net/project.html. Accessed on 23 March 2011

  • Huang C, Ruan D (2008) Fuzzy risks and an updating algorithm with new observations. Risk Anal 28:681–694

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Sadiq R (2005) Risk-based prioritization of air pollution monitoring using fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique. Environ Monit Assess 105:261–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Sadiq R, Haddara MM (2004) Risk-based inspection and maintenance (RBIM):multi-attribute decision-making with aggregative risk analysis. Process Saf Environ Prot 82(B6):398–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klir GJ, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic––theory and Applications. Prentice- Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lee H-M (1996) Applying fuzzy set theory to evaluate the rate of aggregative risk in software development. Fuzzy Sets Syst 79:323–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JW, Kim SH (2001) An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection. Int J Proj Manag 19(2):111–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahant N, Bechtel Corporation (2004) Risk assessment is fuzzy business—fuzzy logic provides the way to assess off-site risk from industrial installations. Available online at: http://www.bechtel.com/assets/files/PDF/BIP/34936.pdf. Accessed on 27 March 2011

  • McCauley-Bell P, Badiru AB (1996) Fuzzy modeling and analytic hierarchy processing to quantify risk levels associated with occupational injuries–Part I: the development of fuzzy linguistic risk levels. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 4(2):124–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilon PJ (ed) (2004) Guidelines for reducing flood losses. United Nations, New York

  • Plate EJ (1999) Flood risk management: a strategy to cope with floods. In: Bronstert A, Ghazi A, Hladny J, Kundzewicz ZW, Menzel L (eds) Proceedings of the European meeting on the Oder Flood 1997. Ribamod concerted action, European Communities. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg, pp 115–128

  • Plate EJ (2002) Flood risk and flood management. J Hydrol 267:2–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1996) Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (2001) How to make a decision? In: Saaty TL, Vargas LG (eds) Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process, Chap 1. Kluwer International Series, Boston

  • Sadiq R, Husain T (2005) A fuzzy-based methodology for an aggregative environmental risk assessment: a case study of drilling waste. Environ Model Softw 20:33–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadiq R, Kleiner Y, Rajani B (2003) Water quality failure in distribution networks: a framework for an aggregative risk analysis. In: American Water Works Association (AWWA) annual conference, NRC-IRC publications, Anaheim, 15–19 June 2003

  • Sadiq R, Kleiner Y, Rajani B (2004) Aggregative risk analysis for water quality failure in distribution network. J Water Supply 4(53):243–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadiq R, Kleiner Y, Rajani B (2007) Water quality failures in distribution networks––risk analysis using fuzzy logic and evidential reasoning. Risk Analy Int J 27(5):1381–1394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schanze J (2006) Flood risk management––a basic framework. In: Schanze J, Zeman E, Marsalek J (eds) Flood Risk Management; Hazards, Vulnerability and Mitigation Measures. NATO Science Series - IV. Earth and Environmental Sciences, 67. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmucker KJ (1984) Fuzzy sets natural language computations, and risk analysis. Computer Science Press, Rockville

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Simonovic SP, Ahmad S (2005) Computer-based model for flood evacuation emergency planning. Nat Hazard 34:25–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolk J (2009) Complex systems simulation for risk assessment in flood incident management. 18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress, Australia

  • Vlachos E (1995) Socio-economic impacts and consequences of extreme floods. US–Italy Research Workshop on the Hydrometeorology, Impacts and Management of Extreme Floods, Perugia

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1980) A general class of fuzzy connectives. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 4:235–242

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1996) Fuzzy logic computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 4(2):103–111

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper presents the results of an ongoing research funded under Canada NSERC-ENGAGE of the second and third authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rehan Sadiq.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Das, S., Sadiq, R. & Tesfamariam, S. An aggregative fuzzy risk analysis for flood incident management. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 2, 31–40 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-011-0053-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-011-0053-x

Keywords

Navigation