Economic risk analysis for sustainable urban development: validation of framework and decision support technique

AbstractSustainable urban development requires detailed assessment of economic, environmental and social impacts borne by major stakeholders. A framework to address these complex issues underpinning sustainable urban development is proposed to aid decision making in the face of uncertainties. An analytical approach is developed as a tool to assist decision makers by using an engineering approach, risk-based cost-benefit analysis model that encompasses concepts from “Life Cycle Costing”, “Engineering Reliability Analysis” and “Risk Management”. It aims to rank design options based on model outputs, such as rate of return, probability of loss and value at risk. This study presents the logic of this approach and tests the framework using a synthetic project formulated around the economic perspective of an investor in considering the implementation of various desalination plant technologies. Two alternative desalination plants were evaluated based on a collective of project information, and the results showed...

[1]  D. Hendricks,et al.  Evaluation of Value-at-Risk Models Using Historical Data , 1996 .

[2]  Daniel Straub,et al.  Bayesian Network Enhanced with Structural Reliability Methods: Methodology , 2010, 1203.5986.

[3]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Eng Seng Chia,et al.  Risk Assessment Framework for Project Management , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Engineering Management Conference.

[5]  Hai An,et al.  Reliability analysis of stochastic structural system considering static strength, stiffness and fatigue , 2007 .

[6]  N. Hanley,et al.  Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment , 1994 .

[7]  Wenyuan Li,et al.  Boundary Analysis of Distribution Reliability and Economic Assessment , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[8]  David Lloyd Owen.  Towards sustainable desalination , 2011 .

[9]  J. Fava,et al.  Life‐Cycle Assessment Practitioner Survey: Summary of Results , 2006 .

[10]  B. Tether,et al.  Project risk management and design flexibility: Analysing a case and conditions of complementarity , 2011 .

[11]  S. White,et al.  The use of levelised cost in comparing supply and demand side options , 2003 .

[12]  Pei Pei,et al.  Pitfalls in Backtesting Historical Simulation VAR Models , 2012 .

[13]  Ana Nieto-Morote,et al.  A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment , 2011 .

[14]  Sigrid Stagl,et al.  SDRN Rapid Research and Evidence Review on Emerging Methods for Sustainability Valuation and Appraisal , 2007 .

[15]  Zongwu Cai,et al.  Nonparametric estimation of conditional VaR and expected shortfall , 2008 .

[16]  Kevin Dowd,et al.  Adjusting for risk:: An improved Sharpe ratio , 2000 .

[17]  Andreas Krause.  Exploring the Limitations of Value at Risk: How Good Is It in Practice? , 2003 .

[18]  Neil D. Pearson,et al.  Value at Risk , 2000 .

[19]  Kirsten Schliephake,et al.  Overview of treatment processes for the production of fit for purpose water: desalination and membrane technologies , 2005 .

[20]  Ouk Sub Lee,et al.  The reliability estimation of pipeline using FORM, SORM and Monte Carlo Simulation with FAD , 2006 .

[21]  Peter Friis-Hansen,et al.  Risk-based economic decision analysis of remediation options at a PCE-contaminated site. , 2010, Journal of environmental management.

[22]  Achintya Haldar,et al.  Probability, Reliability and Statistical Methods in Engineering Design (Haldar, Mahadevan) , 1999 .

[23]  Shengqiang Shen,et al.  Thermodynamic performance of a low temperature multi-effect distillation experimental unit with horizontal-tube falling film evaporation , 2011 .

[24]  Bilal M. Ayyub,et al.  Methodology for Developing Reliability‐Based Load and Resistance Factor Design(LRFD) Guidelines for Ship Structures , 2002 .