4.5 Article

Occupational health and safety risk assessment using an integrated SWARA-MABAC model under bipolar fuzzy environment

Journal

COMPUTATIONAL & APPLIED MATHEMATICS
Volume 39, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s40314-020-01311-7

Keywords

Occupational health and safety (OHS); Bipolar fuzzy set; Stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA); Multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC); Risk assessment

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61773250, 71671125]
  2. Program for Shanghai Youth Top-Notch Talent

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Occupational health and safety (OHS) is a systemic and multidisciplinary activity for anticipating, recognizing, evaluating and controlling the hazards that may impair the health of workers. Risk assessment of hazards plays a critical role in the OHS. However, due to the vagueness and uncertainty of information, it is difficult for experts to express their opinions with crisp numbers in the risk assessment process. In this paper, we present a new OHS model, which integrates bipolar fuzzy sets (BFSs) and multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) method, for the risk assessment of occupational hazards. Specifically, the BFSs are utilized to deal with the vague and uncertain assessment information of hazards provided by experts and the MABAC method is used to determine the risk ranking of hazards. Moreover, we extend the stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) method with BFSs to obtain the weights of risk criteria. Finally, the occupational hazard risk assessment example on construction sites is conducted and a comparative analysis is performed to verify the effectiveness and availability of our proposed OHS model. The results show that the new integrated model provides a more effective and practical method for the risk prioritization of occupational hazards in OHS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available