Advertisement

A Quantitative Model for Budget Allocation for Investment in Safety Measures

  • Yuji Sato
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 10)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to develop a quantitative model for budget allocation for investment in safety measures in a chemical plant, for determining the sustainability of the company. Developing the model in conjunction with decision-making on strategic investments for safety is complicated because of the subjective factors that enter into the inspection of chemical plants and the choice of appropriate safety measures. This study addressed this problem by applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), showing how to quantify inherent risks within a chemical plant for the optimization of the budget allocation for investment in safety measures. A case study was carried out, which clarified the correlation between safety measures and the degree of risk reduction and guided how to allocate budget for safety measures.

Keywords

budget allocation investment in safety measures percent complete 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beaumont, N.B.: Investment decisions in Australian manufac-turing. Technovation 18(11), 689–695 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Björn, W.: Models, modelling and modellers: an application to risk analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 75(3), 77–487 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. Frank, L.: Approaches to risk and uncertainty in the appraisal of new technology capital projects. International Journal of Production Economics 53(1), 21–33 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. O’Brien, C., Smith, S.J.E.: Design of the decision process for strategic investment in advanced manufacturing systems. International Journal of Production Economics 30-31, 309–322 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Satya, S.C.: Six Sigma programs: An implementation model. International Journal of Production Economics 119(1), 1–16 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Snee, R.D.: Why should statisticians pay attention to Six Sigma? Quality Progress, 100–103 (September 1999)Google Scholar
  7. Tennant, G.: SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services. Gower Publishing, Co. Ltd, UK (2001)Google Scholar
  8. Vargas, L.G.: An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research 48, 2–8 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ying-Ming, W., Kwai-Sang, C., Gary, K.K.P., Jian-Bo, Y.: Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean. Expert Systems with Applications 36(2-1), 1195–1207 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. van der Zee, D.J.: Modelling decision making and control in manufacturing simulation. International Journal of Production Eco-nomics 100(1), 155–167 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. Zigmund, B., Pavel, G.: Failure Analysis of FMEA. Advanced Logistics Development, Tel-Aviv, Israel (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuji Sato
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Policy ScienceMie Chukyo UniversityMatsusakaJapan

Personalised recommendations