IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i13p5790-d1430591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment for Sustainable Shipyard Floating Dock Operations: An Integrated Spherical Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy CoCoSo Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Semra Bayhun

    (Occupational Safety and Health Doctorate Program, Department of Industrial Engineering, Yıldız Technical University, 34349 Istanbul, Turkey)

  • Nihan Çetin Demirel

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Yıldız Technical University, 34349 Istanbul, Turkey)

Abstract

Background: This study investigated the process of selecting sustainable safety protocols for floating dock operations in shipyards by identifying potential workplace risks in emergency situations. Thirteen occupational hazards for shipyard floating dock operations were identified through a literature review and expert discussions. Methods: We incorporated four risk elements (consequence: C, frequency: F, probability: P, and number of people at risk: NP) from the Fine–Kinney and Hazard Rating Number System (HRNS) approaches as the risk assessment criteria. We obtained the importance weights of the risk assessment criteria via the Spherical Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (SF-AHP) and extended the Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method within the fuzzy framework to prioritize occupational hazards. This study demonstrated the practicality and efficiency of the proposed emergency risk assessment model for shipyard floating dock operations through a case example of occupational risk assessment. Results: The analysis results show that H4 is the occupational hazard with the highest priority, with a score of 3.553. H4 represents the hazard associated with insufficient access to the entire pool area. The second and third most important hazards are the inability of cranes to move freely in and out of the berthing dock and the inability to dispatch emergency teams. These hazards, denoted H1 and H12, follow closely behind with scores of 3.391 and 3.344, respectively. H10 is deemed the least concerning hazard, with a score of 1.802. Conclusions: Professionals can handle complex and uncertain risk assessment data more flexibly using the proposed system, which excels in accurately organizing occupational hazards.

Suggested Citation

  • Semra Bayhun & Nihan Çetin Demirel, 2024. "Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment for Sustainable Shipyard Floating Dock Operations: An Integrated Spherical Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy CoCoSo Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5790-:d:1430591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5790/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5790/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chang, Chia-Hsun & Kontovas, Christos & Yu, Qing & Yang, Zaili, 2021. "Risk assessment of the operations of maritime autonomous surface ships," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    2. Zhi Wen & Huchang Liao & Ruxue Ren & Chunguang Bai & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Abdullah Al-Barakati, 2019. "Cold Chain Logistics Management of Medicine with an Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Liu, Hu-Chen & You, Jian-Xin & Duan, Chun-Yan, 2019. "An integrated approach for failure mode and effect analysis under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 163-172.
    4. Xiang Ziquan & Yang Jiaqi & Muhammad Hamza Naseem & Xiang Zuquan, 2021. "Occupational Health and Safety Risk Assessment of Cruise Ship Construction Based on Improved Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS Decision Model," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-13, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hua Shi & Lin Huang & Ke Li & Xiang-Hu Wang & Hu-Chen Liu, 2022. "An Extended Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison Method for Emergency Decision Making with Complex Linguistic Information," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-16, September.
    2. Zhou, Jing & Liu, Yu & Liang, Decui & Tang, Maochun, 2023. "A new risk analysis approach to seek best production action during new product introduction," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    3. Antão, P. & Sun, S. & Teixeira, A.P. & Guedes Soares, C., 2023. "Quantitative assessment of ship collision risk influencing factors from worldwide accident and fleet data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    4. Zhang, Jinfeng & Jin, Mei & Wan, Chengpeng & Dong, Zhijie & Wu, Xiaohong, 2024. "A Bayesian network-based model for risk modeling and scenario deduction of collision accidents of inland intelligent ships," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    5. Uflaz, Esma & Sezer, Sukru Ilke & Tunçel, Ahmet Lutfi & Aydin, Muhammet & Akyuz, Emre & Arslan, Ozcan, 2024. "Quantifying potential cyber-attack risks in maritime transportation under Dempster–Shafer theory FMECA and rule-based Bayesian network modelling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    6. Zhang, Yan & Wang, Yu-Hao & Zhao, Xu & Tong, Rui-Peng, 2023. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of emergency response for intelligent coal mining face system, case study: Gas overrun scenario," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    7. Zhou, Yusheng & Li, Xue & Yuen, Kum Fai, 2022. "Holistic risk assessment of container shipping service based on Bayesian Network Modelling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    8. Liu, Aijun & Li, Zengxian & Shang, Wen-Long & Ochieng, Washington, 2023. "Performance evaluation model of transportation infrastructure: Perspective of COVID-19," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    9. Ruhaimatu Abudu & Raj Bridgelall, 2024. "Autonomous Ships: A Thematic Review," World, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Cheng, Tingting & Veitch, Erik A. & Utne, Ingrid Bouwer & Ramos, Marilia A. & Mosleh, Ali & Alsos, Ole Andreas & Wu, Bing, 2024. "Analysis of human errors in human-autonomy collaboration in autonomous ships operations through shore control experimental data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    11. Chelouati, Mohammed & Boussif, Abderraouf & Beugin, Julie & El Koursi, El-Miloudi, 2023. "Graphical safety assurance case using Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) — challenges, opportunities and a framework for autonomous trains," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    12. Ranka Gojković & Goran Đurić & Danijela Tadić & Snežana Nestić & Aleksandar Aleksić, 2021. "Evaluation and Selection of the Quality Methods for Manufacturing Process Reliability Improvement—Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Genetic Algorithm Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Chuanqi Guo & Stein Haugen & Ingrid B Utne, 2023. "Risk assessment of collisions of an autonomous passenger ferry," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 425-435, April.
    14. Joanna Fabis-Domagala & Mariusz Domagala & Hassan Momeni, 2021. "A Concept of Risk Prioritization in FMEA Analysis for Fluid Power Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Guo, Yunlong & Jin, Yongxing & Hu, Shenping & Yang, Zaili & Xi, Yongtao & Han, Bing, 2023. "Risk evolution analysis of ship pilotage operation by an integrated model of FRAM and DBN," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    16. Jonathan Davis & John Vogt, 2021. "Hidden Supply Chain Risk and Incoterms ® : Analysis and Mitigation Strategies," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Fan, Cunlong & Montewka, Jakub & Zhang, Di, 2022. "A risk comparison framework for autonomous ships navigation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    18. Faghih-Roohi, Shahrzad & Akcay, Alp & Zhang, Yingqian & Shekarian, Ehsan & de Jong, Eelco, 2020. "A group risk assessment approach for the selection of pharmaceutical product shipping lanes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    19. Jia Huang & Hu-Chen Liu & Chun-Yan Duan & Ming-Shun Song, 2022. "An improved reliability model for FMEA using probabilistic linguistic term sets and TODIM method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(1), pages 235-258, May.
    20. Tsoumpris, Charalampos & Theotokatos, Gerasimos, 2023. "A decision-making approach for the health-aware energy management of ship hybrid power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).

    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:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5790-:d:1430591. 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.