Abstract
Stream stabilization designers are often faced with the challenge of selecting effective bank stabilization measures. The potential benefits of stream stabilization measures can be economic, environmental, or social. Depending on the level of the potential benefit, a designer may be willing to take higher risks in implementing a given measure. A risk-benefit analysis is presented here that involves a qualitative analysis of risk and benefit (using failure modes and effects analysis) and risk and benefit quantification in terms of cost. The initial result of the method is the establishment of risk priority numbers (RPNs) and benefit priority numbers (BPNs), which provide a relative qualitative measure of the potential risk and benefit and can be used to prioritize and rank measures. The results of the qualitative analysis are then used to estimate risk and benefit quantitatively in terms of cost. These quantitative values are then compared for several stabilization alternatives to provide justification and guidance on selecting the most effective alternative. The risk-benefit method is applied to select a stream stabilization measure for a stream rehabilitation project in Indiana.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 449-461 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Journal of Hydraulic Engineering |
| Volume | 138 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 10 2012 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Civil and Structural Engineering
- Water Science and Technology
- Mechanical Engineering
Cite this
}
Applying Risk-Benefit Analysis to Select an Appropriate Streambank Stabilization Measure. / Niezgoda, Sue L.; Johnson, Peggy Ann.
In: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 138, No. 5, 10.05.2012, p. 449-461.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Applying Risk-Benefit Analysis to Select an Appropriate Streambank Stabilization Measure
AU - Niezgoda, Sue L.
AU - Johnson, Peggy Ann
PY - 2012/5/10
Y1 - 2012/5/10
N2 - Stream stabilization designers are often faced with the challenge of selecting effective bank stabilization measures. The potential benefits of stream stabilization measures can be economic, environmental, or social. Depending on the level of the potential benefit, a designer may be willing to take higher risks in implementing a given measure. A risk-benefit analysis is presented here that involves a qualitative analysis of risk and benefit (using failure modes and effects analysis) and risk and benefit quantification in terms of cost. The initial result of the method is the establishment of risk priority numbers (RPNs) and benefit priority numbers (BPNs), which provide a relative qualitative measure of the potential risk and benefit and can be used to prioritize and rank measures. The results of the qualitative analysis are then used to estimate risk and benefit quantitatively in terms of cost. These quantitative values are then compared for several stabilization alternatives to provide justification and guidance on selecting the most effective alternative. The risk-benefit method is applied to select a stream stabilization measure for a stream rehabilitation project in Indiana.
AB - Stream stabilization designers are often faced with the challenge of selecting effective bank stabilization measures. The potential benefits of stream stabilization measures can be economic, environmental, or social. Depending on the level of the potential benefit, a designer may be willing to take higher risks in implementing a given measure. A risk-benefit analysis is presented here that involves a qualitative analysis of risk and benefit (using failure modes and effects analysis) and risk and benefit quantification in terms of cost. The initial result of the method is the establishment of risk priority numbers (RPNs) and benefit priority numbers (BPNs), which provide a relative qualitative measure of the potential risk and benefit and can be used to prioritize and rank measures. The results of the qualitative analysis are then used to estimate risk and benefit quantitatively in terms of cost. These quantitative values are then compared for several stabilization alternatives to provide justification and guidance on selecting the most effective alternative. The risk-benefit method is applied to select a stream stabilization measure for a stream rehabilitation project in Indiana.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860894686&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860894686&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000530
DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000530
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84860894686
VL - 138
SP - 449
EP - 461
JO - Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
JF - Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
SN - 0733-9429
IS - 5
ER -