CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Public-Private Partnership ProjectsConstruction Project Management and PerformanceMulti-Criteria Decision Making

A fuzzy analytic network process method for risk prioritization in freeway PPP projects: An Iranian case study

Open access
Valipour, Alireza, Yahaya, Nordin, Md Noor, Norhazilan, Kildienė, Simona, Sarvari, Hadi, Mardani, Abbas·2015·Journal of Civil Engineering and Management
DOI 10.3846/13923730.2015.1051104
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Risk assessment is one of the most important factors in achieving success in public-private partnership (PPP) projects. Some relationships between risks in freeway projects have been established. The occurrence of each risk can worsen the effects of others such as a negative impact of financial risks on construction risks. This paper is aimed at prioritizing significant risks in freeway PPP projects applying a fuzzy analytic network process (FANP) method for overcoming the problems of interdependencies and feedback among different risk-ranking alternatives. Data on the study have been collected through a literature review, an interview and a questionnaire survey distributed to experts in the field of freeway PPP projects. The obtained results have shown that financial, legal and political risks are the most significant groups, although improper design, changes in the value of granted lands and the termination of concession are the most important risks. The findings help with strengthening the capabilities of developing countries for risk management in freeway PPP projects.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3846/13923730.2015.1051104

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The fundamental limitation of analytical network processing is that it performs a pairwise comparison while assigning a crisp value, which cannot capture uncertainty and stochastic behavior in risk data of complex projects.

    “However, the fundamental limitation of this approach is that it performs a pairwise comparison while assigning a crisp value [29] to capture uncertainty and stochastic behavior in risk data of complex projects [30].”

    From Cost Overrun Risk Assessment and Prediction in Construction Projects: A Bayesian Network Classifier Approach (2022) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Literature review (section 1) says crisp pairwise comparisons in traditional ANP are too imprecise to capture decision-makers’ uncertain judgments. Section 2.3 likewise says ANP may inadequately handle ambiguity when mapping judgments to exact numbers. The paper does not establish the broader claim about stochastic behavior in project risk data; in the printed sentence, that phrase follows a separate citation [30]. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Kaur, P.; Mahanti, N. 2008. A fuzzy ANP-based approach for selecting ERP vendors, International Journal of Soft Com- puting 3(1): 24-32.
  2. Saaty, T. L.; Vargas, L. G. 2006. Decision making with the ana- lytic network process. New York: Springer Science. 363 p.
  3. Norhazilan MOHAMAD NOOR. Obtained his Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering (BEng) in 2000 and Master's Degree in Engineering (MEng. Structure) in 2002 from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). He completed his PhD in the area of reliability assessment from Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland, in 2006. Currently, he is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Civil Engineering of UTM. He has also been appointed as an Academic Coordinator for Postgraduates (research) in UTM. He is a former editor-in-chief of the Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering. His main research interests include the application of multiple criteria decision making theories in construction management, project management, reliability assessment, PPP risk management and pipeline Soil-Corrosion Integrity Assessment.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Valipour, A., Yahaya, N., Md Noor, N., Kildienė, S., Sarvari, H., & Mardani, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Malaysia (MY)
  • Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
  • Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (LT)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Civil Engineering and Management
Publisher
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
Published
2015-07-10
Volume
21
Issue
7
Pages
933-947
ISSN
  • 1392-3730 (ISSN-L)
  • 1822-3605
DOI
10.3846/13923730.2015.1051104
OpenAlex
W2198723878
Cited by
111
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2013: 1
FWCI
19.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Civil Engineering and Management (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Kementerian Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi (4S084)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Public-Private Partnership Projects
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Construction Project Management and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Keywords
public-private partnerships, risk prioritization, fuzzy analytic network process, risk assessment, risk interdependencies, financial risk, legal risk, political risk, land value change, risk management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review