IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6175-d819081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Assessment of Crowd-Gathering in Urban Open Public Spaces Supported by Spatio-Temporal Big Data

Author

Listed:
  • Yicheng Yang

    (School of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China)

  • Jia Yu

    (School of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China
    Key Innovation Group of Digital Humanities Resource and Research, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China)

  • Chenyu Wang

    (School of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China)

  • Jiahong Wen

    (School of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China)

Abstract

The urban open public spaces are the areas where people tend to gather together, which may lead to great crowd-gathering risk. This paper proposes a new method to assess the rank and spatial distribution of crowd-gathering risk in open public spaces in a large urban area. Firstly, a crowd density estimation method based on Tencent user density (TUD) data is built for different times in open public spaces. Then, a reasonable crowd density threshold is delimited to detect critical crowd situations in open public spaces and find out the key open public spaces that need to have intensive crowd-gathering prevention. For estimating the crowd-gathering risk in key open public spaces, the quantified risk assessment approach is conducted based on the classical risk theory that simultaneously considers the probability of an accident occurring, the severity of the accident consequence, and the risk aversion factor. A case study of the area within the Outer-ring Road of Shanghai was conducted to determine the feasibility of the new method. The thematic maps that describe the ranks and spatial distribution of crowd-gathering risk were generated. According to the risk maps, the government can determine the crowd control measures in different areas to reduce the crowd-gathering risk and prevent dangerous events.

Suggested Citation

  • Yicheng Yang & Jia Yu & Chenyu Wang & Jiahong Wen, 2022. "Risk Assessment of Crowd-Gathering in Urban Open Public Spaces Supported by Spatio-Temporal Big Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6175-:d:819081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6175/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6175/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heba Kurdi & Amal Alzuhair & Dana Alotaibi & Hesah Alsweed & Noor Almoqayyad & Razan Albaqami & Alhanoof Althnian & Najla Alnabhan & A. B. M. Alim Al Islam, 2022. "Crowd Evacuation in Hajj Stoning Area: Planning through Modeling and Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Xiaohong Li & Jianan Zhou & Feng Chen & Zan Zhang, 2018. "Cluster Risk of Walking Scenarios Based on Macroscopic Flow Model and Crowding Force Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yanyan Niu & Jia Yu & Dawei Lu & Renwu Mu & Jiahong Wen, 2022. "Spatial Allocation Method of Evacuation Guiders in Urban Open Public Spaces: A Case Study of Binjiang Green Space in Xuhui District, Shanghai, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-25, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    2. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mussard, Stéphane & Pi Alperin, María Noel, 2021. "Accounting for risk factors on health outcomes: The case of Luxembourg," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1180-1197.
    4. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    5. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    6. Heiner Ackermann & Erik Diessel & Michael Helmling & Neil Jami & Johanna Münch, 2024. "Computing Optimal Mitigation Plans for Force-Majeure Scenarios in Dynamic Manufacturing Chains," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1-35, June.
    7. Aigner, Philipp & Schlütter, Sebastian, 2023. "Enhancing gradient capital allocation with orthogonal convexity scenarios," ICIR Working Paper Series 47/23, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
    8. Mangirdas Morkunas & Gintaras Cernius & Gintare Giriuniene, 2019. "Assessing Business Risks of Natural Gas Trading Companies: Evidence from GET Baltic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    10. Dr Jason Mwanza & Nothando Tshuma, 2023. "Mitigating Business Risk in Manufacturing SMEs: A nexus between informal and formal business risk management: A case of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(1), pages 1107-1138, January.
    11. Li, Weijun & Sun, Qiqi & Zhang, Jiwang & Zhang, Laibin, 2024. "Quantitative risk assessment of industrial hot work using Adaptive Bow Tie and Petri Nets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    12. Ekaterine Gulua & Natalia Kharadze, 2022. "Employed Students' Development Challenges in Georgia," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 8, ejis_v8_i.
    13. Don Pagach & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2020. "The Challenges and Opportunities for ERM Post-COVID-19: Agendas for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    14. KeumJi Kim & SeongHwan Yoon, 2018. "Assessment of Building Damage Risk by Natural Disasters in South Korea Using Decision Tree Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    15. Aven, Terje, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    16. Tatiana Yu. Kudryavtseva & Angi E. Skhvediani & Maiia S. Leukhina & Alexandra O. Schneider, 2023. "A Fuzzy Model for Personnel Risk Analysis: Case of Russian-Finnish Export-Import Operations of Small and Medium Enterprises," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 22(3), pages 683-709.
    17. Marcin Nowak & Rafał Mierzwiak & Marcin Butlewski, 2020. "Occupational risk assessment with grey system theory," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 717-732, June.
    18. Kjell Hausken, 2019. "Principal–Agent Theory, Game Theory, and the Precautionary Principle," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 105-127, June.
    19. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    20. Štefan Markulik & Marek Šolc & Peter Blaško, 2024. "Use of Risk Management to Support Business Sustainability in the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-24, May.
    21. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6175-:d:819081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.