An All-Hazards Return on Investment (ROI) Model to Evaluate U.S. Army Installation Resilient Strategies
Systems
Abstract and Figures
The paper describes our project to develop, verify, and deploy an All-Hazards Return of Investment (ROI) model for the U. S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to provide army installations with a decision support tool for evaluating strategies to make existing installation facilities more resilient. The need for increased resilience to extreme weather caused by climate change was required by U.S. code and DoD guidance, as well as an army strategic plan that stipulated an ROI model to evaluate relevant resilient strategies. During the project, the ERDC integrated the University of Arkansas designed model into a new army installation planning tool and expanded the scope to evaluate resilient options from climate to all hazards. Our methodology included research on policy, data sources, resilient options, and analytical techniques, along with stakeholder interviews and weekly meetings with installation planning tool developers. The ROI model uses standard risk analysis and engineering economics terms and analyzes potential installation hazards and resilient strategies using data in the installation planning tool. The ROI model calculates the expected net present cost without the resilient strategy, the expected net present cost with the resilient strategy, and ROI for each resilient strategy. The minimum viable product ROI model was formulated mathematically, coded in Python, verified using hazard scenarios, and provided to the ERDC for implementation.
![Task 2.9 from AIS-IP [7].](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388562337/figure/fig1/AS:11431281317943067@1742483266481/Task-29-from-AIS-IP-7_Q320.jpg)
Figures - available from: Systems
This content is subject to copyright.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Scientific experiments cover a wide range of fields—from basic to applied scientific research. Chemical experiments are the basis for cultivating chemical knowledge in scientific experiments and are an important way to cultivate scientific thinking and methods. However, due to the toxicity or flammability of the chemical substances in the experiments, hazardous events often lead to personal injuries and environmental damage. Exactly assessing risk factors and reducing the risk of hazards to protect the experimenters and ensure environmental safety are crucial in chemical experiments. However, while the traditional risk evaluation method cannot consider the weight of risk evaluation criteria, it also cannot effectively address problems through hierarchical analysis, as well as imprecise and ambiguous information inherent in human cognition. Therefore, this paper proposed an approach based on failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to assess the risk of chemical experiments in a fuzzy information environment. The approach combines the typical analytic hierarchy process (AHP), the risk priority number (RPN) of FMEA, and the intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS) methods to evaluate risks associated with chemical experiments and consider the damage recovery in chemical experiments. This study applied the case of a university chemistry experiment, “preparation of hydrogels”, to validate the reasonableness and correctness of the proposed approach and compare its numerical verification results with those from the typical RPN, the AHP-RPN, and the AHP-fuzzy risk priority number (AHP-FRPN) methods. The finding demonstrates that the proposed method can more effectively address risk evaluation problems in chemical experiments than the other methods. This result serves as an important reference for reducing chemical experiment risk occurrences.
This study uses machine learning to investigate the effects of firm and CEO characteristics on stock price crash risk by collecting massive data on publicly listed firms in China. The results show that eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) is the most effective model for predicting stock price crash risk, with relatively satisfactory performance. Meanwhile, the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method is used to interpret the importance of features. The results show that the average weekly return of a firm over a year (RET) contributes the most and is negatively associated with crash risk, followed by Sigma, IPO age, and firm size. We also found that, among CEO characteristics, CEO pay contributes substantially to crash risk at the firm level. Our findings have important implications for research into the impact of firm and CEO characteristics on stock price crash risk and provide a novel way for investors to plan their investment decisions and risk-taking behavior rationally.
With the economic development in China, haze risks are frequent. It is important to study the urban haze risk assessment to manage the haze disaster. The haze risk assessment indexes of 11 cities in Fenwei Plain were selected from three aspects: the sensitivity of disaster-inducing environments, haze component hazards and the vulnerability of disaster-bearing bodies, combined with regional disaster system theory. The haze hazard risk levels of 11 cities in Fenwei Plain were evaluated using the matter-element extension (MEE) model, and the indicator weights were determined by improving the principal component analysis (PCA) method using the entropy weight method, and finally, five haze hazard risk assessment models were established by improving the particle swarm optimization (IPSO) light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) algorithm. It is used to assess the risk of affected populations, transportation damage risk, crop damage area risk, direct economic loss risk and comprehensive disaster risk before a disaster event occurs. The experimental comparison shows that the haze risk index of Xi’an city is the highest, and the full index can improve the evaluation accuracy by 4–16% compared with only the causative factor index, which indicates that the proposed PCA-MEE-ISPO-LightGBM model evaluation results are more realistic and reliable.
Technological hazards induced by natural hazards have a significant impact on human life and economy. Their power exceeds the impact of the natural hazards that caused them. However, most of the multi-hazard risk maps failed to incorporate technological hazards when mapping multi hazard risk. To address this problem, we established a hybrid multi-hazard risk assessment methodology that calculates the risk caused by natural and technological hazards in a three-step process. First, the possible natural and technological hazards in a given region are identified by hazard-forming environment analysis and hazard source investigation respectively. A scenario simulation is adopted to analyze the intensity and impact scope of these hazards. Second, the triggered relationships among natural and technological hazards are analyzed by a hazard matrix. Then, the radar graph is adopted to calculate the multi-hazard intensity under the coupling effect of all possible hazards in this region. Third, the multi-hazard risk is calculated by aggregating land use data and multi-hazard intensity together. This methodology was applied in Huairou Science City (HSC), Beijing. The result shows that the joint action of earthquake and liquid ammonia leakage is the main reason for the high risk in the central area of HSC. The methodology developed in this study can clearly show the different impacts of each hazard on a given region under the action of hazard coupling, and the calculated results can better reflect the actual disaster situation.
In commemorating the 40th anniversary of Risk Analysis, this article takes a retrospective look at some of the ways in which decision analysis (as a “sibling field”) has contributed to the development both of the journal, and of risk analysis as a field. I begin with some early foundational papers from the first decade of the journal's history. I then review a number of papers that have applied decision analysis to risk problems over the years, including applications of related methods such as influence diagrams, multicriteria decision analysis, and risk matrices. The article then reviews some recent trends, from roughly the last five years, and concludes with observations about the parallel evolution of risk analysis and decision analysis over the decades—especially with regard to the importance of representing multiple stakeholder perspectives, and the importance of behavioral realism in decision models. Overall, the extensive literature surveyed here supports the view that the incorporation of decision‐analytic perspectives has improved the practice of risk analysis.
This paper surveys the literature on resilience, provides several definitions of resilience, and proposes a new comprehensive definition for a resilient engineered system, which is: a system that is able to successfully complete its planned mission(s) in the face of disruption(s) (environmental or adversarial), and has capabilities allowing it to successfully complete future missions with evolving threats. This definition captures the subtle differences between resilience and a resilient engineered system. We further examine the terminology associated with resilience to understand the various resilient time-frames and use the terminology to propose a resilience cycle, which differentiates mission resilience (short term) and platform resilience (long term). We then provide insight into various resilience evaluation methodologies and discuss how understanding the full scope of resilience enable designers to better incorporate resilience into system design, decision makers to consider resilient trade-offs in their assessment, and operators to better manage their systems. A resilient engineered system can lead to improved performance, reduced life-cycle costs, increased value, and extended service life for engineered systems.
Many areas of the world are prone to several natural hazards, and effective risk reduction is only possible if all relevant threats are considered and analyzed. However, in contrast to single-hazard analyses, the examination of multiple hazards poses a range of additional challenges due to the differing characteristics of processes. This refers to the assessment of the hazard level, as well as to the vulnerability toward distinct processes, and to the arising risk level. As comparability of the single-hazard results is strongly needed, an equivalent approach has to be chosen that allows to estimate the overall hazard and consequent risk level as well as to rank threats. In addition, the visualization of a range of natural hazards or risks is a challenging task since the high quantity of information has to be depicted in a way that allows for easy and clear interpretation. The aim of this contribution is to give an outline of the challenges each step of a multi-hazard (risk) analysis poses and to present current studies and approaches that face these difficulties.
Multi-hazard risks pose manifold challenges in the world due to different spatial and temporal scales of hazardous incidents and possible interactions between socio-economic activities and several hazards. In this area of study, there has been very little effort, if any, that provides researchers with systematically evaluated information regarding the state of the multi-hazard risk assessment (MHRA) field. To fill this gap, this paper leveraged several state-of-the-art tools (i.e., Bibliometrix R-tool and VOSviewer) for an extensive review analysis. Furthermore, multi-perspective insights based on publication sources, co-citation networks, thematic evolution, and international collaborations are provided regarding the MHRA research field. The results indicate that while a reasonable amount of MHRA-related scholarly work has been produced, no international collaboration is identified for the scholars in the south Asian region, Australia, and South America despite being impacted by multiple hazards and climate change. Such a situation represents a large gap regarding international collaboration, which needs the attention of research institutes, governments, and scholars to advance the field of MHRA research. Even though the number of published articles gradually increased between 2019 and 2022, the major focus of the MHRA field remained on landslide hazards highlighting an under-representation of other geophysical, meteorological, and hydrological hazards. This review paper provides an organized in-depth, detailed network, and a clear roadmap of current development in multi-hazards risk studies to serve as a reference for researchers, risk analysts, environmental engineers, disaster managers, decision-makers, and practitioners in the MHRA research field.
Decision analysis is an operations research/management science (OR/MS) discipline that is designed to help decisions makers faced with difficult decisions, multiple stakeholders with many objectives, complex alternatives, significant uncertainties, and important consequences. This chapter examines the technical foundations of decision analysis. It presents the historical foundations of decision analysis. The chapter defines the tenets of decision theory, embodied in five simple rules of behavior that together provide a complete framework for determining how decisions should be made in the face of uncertainty that are consistent with our preferences. It describes the scope of decision analysis using four dimensions: interacting with decision makers, alternatives, preferences, and uncertainty. The chapter discusses the variations in the practice of decision analysis that have developed during the last half-century, pointing out both differences and similarities in those variations. It reviews an important philosophical perspective on decision analysis called value-focused thinking (VFT), created by Ralph Keeney. Controlled Vocabulary Termsdecision analysis; Decision making; Decision making under uncertainty; Stakeholders