Risk assessment of underground and elevated metro projects from clients' and contractors' perspective

Abstract

Purpose

India is a rapidly urbanizing developing country with a population of 1.4 Billion. Indian governments have invested USD 50 Billion) in metro rail projects in 18 cities. Metro constructions are multi-stakeholder mega-projects and are prone to a variety of risks. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the risks involved in metro rail construction projects in a densely populated developing country for two types of systems and from two perspectives. Current literature lacks an understanding of similarities and differences in the risks involved in underground and elevated metro projects from clients' and contractors' perspectives, which the paper highlights.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of twenty-five risks were identified, categorized and assessed through experts' opinions about the impact and probability of occurrence of the risks through a questionnaire-based survey. The survey respondents included experts in metro rail construction from client and contractor sides. Paper uses a Fuzzy Inference System to calibrate risk magnitude from occurrence probability and impact.

Findings

A notable difference was observed in the views of clients and contractors, except for certain common risks. Both stakeholders had different risk perceptions for the underground and elevated metro rail systems.

Practical implications

This study contributes to the risk assessment for different types of metro systems. This research can help policymakers as well as consultants in prioritizing their risk management strategies in developing countries like India.

Originality/value

Highlighting the critical aspects of risks in metro projects in a developing country, this paper also provides system-based and stakeholder-based comparative aspects of risk analysis.

Citation

Karmarkar, O.D., Krishnan, S.G., Delhi, V.S.K. and Velaga, N.R.R. (2022), "Risk assessment of underground and elevated metro projects from clients' and contractors' perspective", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 887-905. https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-07-2021-0098