Developing a method for evaluating the value of hoisting risk response strategies: a multi-stakeholder perspective

被引:1
|
作者
Yin, Junjia [1 ]
Alias, Aidi Hizami [1 ]
Haron, Nuzul Azam [1 ]
Abu Bakar, Nabilah [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Putra Malaysia, Fac Engn, Dept Civil Engn, Serdang, Malaysia
关键词
Risk response strategy; Entropy weighting method; GLS-SEM; Hoisting; Multi-stakeholder perspective; Value engineering theory; CONSTRUCTION;
D O I
10.1108/ECAM-12-2023-1257
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
PurposeHoisting is an essential construction work package, but there is still a high incidence of accidents due to insufficient attention to coping strategies. This study aims to provide decision support to practitioners on safety protocols by developing a multi-stakeholder risk response model and a novel evaluation method.Design/methodology/approachFirstly, the study summarizes the hoisting risk response strategies system through a literature review and stakeholder theory. Secondly, the study constructed a quantitative theoretical model based on GLS-SEM and questionnaires. Third, the EWM-VA evaluation method was developed to determine the value coefficients of strategies.FindingsThe strategic interaction between government and consultants, consultants and builders, and government and builders are in the top three pronounced. Three coping strategies, "Increase funding for lifting equipment and safety devices," "Improve the quality of safety education and training on lifting construction," and "Conduct regular emergency rescue drills for lifting accidents," have the optimal ratio of benefits to costs.Originality/valueThe hoisting risk strategy model from the perspective of multi-interested subjects proposed by the study is based on the global thinking of the project, which reduces the troubles such as the difficulty of pursuing responsibility and the irrational allocation of strategies that were brought by the previously related studies that only considered a single interested subject. In addition, the EWM-VA evaluation method developed in the study also provides new options for evaluating risk strategies and has the potential to be extended to other fields.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Multi-Stakeholder Cybersecurity Risk Assessment for Data Protection
    Mollaeefar, Majid
    Siena, Alberto
    Ranise, Silvio
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON E-BUSINESS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECRYPT), VOL 1, 2020, : 349 - 356
  • [32] Sustainable investment strategies and a theoretical approach of multi-stakeholder communities
    Tanaka, Hiroshige
    Tanaka, Chiharu
    GREEN FINANCE, 2022, 4 (03): : 329 - 346
  • [33] The impact of policy changes on the mustard ecosystem: a multi-stakeholder perspective
    Ray, Mohit
    Kumar, Avinash
    Srivastava, Samir K.
    JOURNAL OF AGRIBUSINESS IN DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ECONOMIES, 2024, 14 (05) : 1127 - 1147
  • [34] Moral considerations on social robots in education: A multi-stakeholder perspective
    Smakman, Matthijs
    Vogt, Paul
    Konijn, Elly A.
    COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2021, 174
  • [35] The core of secondary level quantum education: a multi-stakeholder perspective
    Merzel, Avraham
    Bitzenbauer, Philipp
    Krijtenburg-Lewerissa, Kim
    Stadermann, Kirsten
    Andreotti, Erica
    Anttila, Daria
    Bondani, Maria
    Chiofalo, Maria Luisa
    Faletic, Sergej
    Frans, Renaat
    Goorney, Simon
    Greinert, Franziska
    Jurcic, Leon
    Koupilova, Zdenka
    Malgieri, Massimiliano
    Mueller, Rainer
    Onorato, Pasquale
    Pospiech, Gesche
    Ubben, Malte
    Woitzik, Andreas
    Pol, Henk
    EPJ QUANTUM TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 11 (01)
  • [36] A multi-stakeholder perspective on sustainable healthcare: From 2030 onwards
    Pereno, Amina
    Eriksson, Daniel
    FUTURES, 2020, 122
  • [37] Port performance in container transport logistics: A multi-stakeholder perspective
    Ha, Min-Ho
    Yang, Zaili
    Lam, Jasmine Siu Lee
    TRANSPORT POLICY, 2019, 73 : 25 - 40
  • [38] Options for imaging cellular therapeutics in vivo: a multi-stakeholder perspective
    Helfer, Brooke M.
    Ponomarev, Vladimir
    Patrick, P. Stephen
    Blower, Philip J.
    Feitel, Alexandra
    Fruhwirth, Gilbert O.
    Jackman, Shawna
    Mouries, Lucilia Pereira
    Park, Margriet V. D. Z.
    Srinivas, Mangala
    Stuckey, Daniel J.
    Thu, Mya S.
    van den Hoorn, Tineke
    Herberts, Carla A.
    Shingleton, William D.
    CYTOTHERAPY, 2021, 23 (09) : 757 - 773
  • [39] Discursive Tensions in CSR Multi-stakeholder Dialogue: A Foucauldian Perspective
    Christiane Marie Høvring
    Sophie Esmann Andersen
    Anne Ellerup Nielsen
    Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 152 : 627 - 645
  • [40] Overburdening of peer reviewers: A multi-stakeholder perspective on causes and effects
    Severin, Anna
    Chataway, Joanna
    LEARNED PUBLISHING, 2021, 34 (04) : 537 - 546