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.
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
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
Khan FI, Sadiq R (2005) Risk-based prioritization of air pollution monitoring using fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique. Environ Monit Assess 105:261–283
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
Klir GJ, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic––theory and Applications. Prentice- Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs
Lee H-M (1996) Applying fuzzy set theory to evaluate the rate of aggregative risk in software development. Fuzzy Sets Syst 79:323–336
Lee JW, Kim SH (2001) An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection. Int J Proj Manag 19(2):111–118
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
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
Saaty TL (1996) Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS, Pittsburgh
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
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
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
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
Schmucker KJ (1984) Fuzzy sets natural language computations, and risk analysis. Computer Science Press, Rockville
Simonovic SP, Ahmad S (2005) Computer-based model for flood evacuation emergency planning. Nat Hazard 34:25–51
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
Yager RR (1980) A general class of fuzzy connectives. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 4:235–242
Zadeh LA (1996) Fuzzy logic computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 4(2):103–111
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
Corresponding author
Rights 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
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-011-0053-x