Risk Assessment Models to Improve Environmental Safety in the Field of the Economy and Organization of Construction: A Case Study of Russia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript is sound and very well written and acceptable for publication in sustainability just it needs some modification in the results and discussion also the highlights of the research need focusing at the end of the introduction, also the study needs more relevant references.the methodology will be fine if the authors can represent it in flowchart or table format.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
The manuscript is sound and very well written and acceptable for publication in sustainability just it needs some modification in the results and discussion also the highlights of the research need focusing at the end of the introduction, also the study needs more relevant references. The methodology will be fine if the authors can represent it in flowchart or table format.
Thank you very much for your high-level assessment of our paper.
Ok. Some modification in the results and discussion, also the highlights of the research is done. To improve the quality of communication, the authors analyzed the alternative of reducing the content presented in the article original form, in an objective way, sending graphic elements (Fig. 2, 5, 6, 11-14, 15, 16) and corresponding secondary quantitative analyzes (Tabl. 1 and 2) to an Appendix, in order to make the text cleaner and more objective.
The authors represented the methodology in flowchart, sending it to an Appendix.
The References section has been revised.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article analyses the applicability of the Monte Carlo method to the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services.
The article presents an interesting and innovative study, with a consistent quantitative approach supported by Monte Carlo simulation.
According to the authors “research of this kind is one of the first (judging by the review of the available literature)”.
Although the paper works with interesting ideas, the literature (reviewed) are not enough clear. A summary table is suggested to support the "theorical gap" of existent models to solve the research problem. It can help understand what kind of problem is not addressed during the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services even though it has been mentioned in the conclusion. It is not easy for reader to summarize the unsolved issues and the corresponding application of addressed issues.
Two theoretical aspects can be better discussed: the necessary effort towards the "consequence" variable and its impact on the result of the risk analysis (r=p.c). In lines 580-582, considering the impact of the necessary amount of funds in the probability and continuing planning and asset management, it is necessary to discuss the impact of the safety culture and other factors such as trainning, human reability, environmental conditions, experience among others.
The results are interesting, but strongly descriptive, lacking in analytical content indexing to the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services study.
In order to improve the quality of communication, the authors may analyze the alternative of reducing the content presented in the article original form, in an objective way, sending some graphic elements and corresponding secondary quantitative analyzes to an appendix, in order to make the text cleaner and more objective.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
The article analyses the applicability of the Monte Carlo method to the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services. The article presents an interesting and innovative study, with a consistent quantitative approach supported by Monte Carlo simulation. According to the authors 'research of this kind is one of the first (judging by the review of the available literature). Although the paperworks with interesting ideas, the literature (reviewed) are not enough clear. A summary table is suggested to support the "theorical gap" of existent models to solve the research problem. It can help understand what kind of problem is not addressed during the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services even though it has been mentioned in the conclusion. It is not easy for reader to summarize the unsolved issues and the corresponding application of addressed issues.
Two theoretical aspects can be better discussed: the necessary effort towards the "consequence" variable and its impact on the result of the risk analysis (r=p.c).
Ok. Thank you for the high-quality evaluation of the work.
The sensitivity diagram shows that s2 and s1 are the key scenario parameters that determine the construction projects’ degree of risk. Therefore, it is important to control them in order to improve the environmental safety of projects. It can also be concluded that in pessimistic and optimistic scenarios, the s2 parameter is a priority instrument of contributions to improve environmental safety in the construction industry.
S2 means the best available technologies based on modern advances in science and technology and the best combination of criteria for achieving environmental protection goals, subject to the availability of technical feasibility (according to Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control)). The use of this kind of technology is aimed at comprehensive prevention and minimization of negative impact on the environment. The normal functioning of the enterprise is being qualitatively updated, since the new system is characterized by the lowest level of negative impact on the environment per unit of time or volume of products produced, work performed; economic efficiency of implementation and operation of installed technologies; application of resource- and energy-saving methods for work. Thus, investments in such technologies improve the environmental and resource efficiency of production, consistently reducing the negative impact on the environment. After the installation of advanced equipment (IAE), the enterprise receives an incentive whereby it does not pay for negative environmental impact, and receives an investment tax credit.
Design, construction and reconstruction of water supply systems, sewerage systems, sewerage networks, structures and installations for the capture and disposal of pollutants; the installation of equipment to improve fuel combustion and waste disposal and automated systems to control the composition and volume or mass of substances polluting the atmosphere and water bodies are also considered technical measures to improve the state of the environment. Accordingly, if the parameter s2 is not updated, then the excess fees for negative impact on the environment and environmental fees become risk factors for large financial losses.
But in Russia, it is not only a matter of promoting IAE for implementation in the field of construction and housing and communal services. With the transition to “green technologies,” the volume of revenues to the budgetary system of the country decreases, and the indicators of the effectiveness of the activities of state bodies in the field of environmental supervision are falling. In 2018, these fees amounted to RUB 13 bln (about $ 0.23 bln) compared to RUB 30.8 bln (approximately $ 1 bln) in 2013. In the absence of a dedicated environmental fund, fines received for pollution are not spent on remediation of environmental damage. The paradox is that companies are paying less and less for environmental pollution. The introduction of an environmental tax instead of an environmental tax, in our opinion, will lead to a deterioration of the investment climate in Russia. Since 2021, a market mechanism has been implemented in the country to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. However, enterprises will have to pay twice: (1) for the negative impact on the environment and an ecological fee, and (2) a new payment for greenhouse gas emissions. Starting in 2025, Russian companies must pay the government $ 100 bln each year as a carbon tax. The introduction of this tax will tighten the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. It is obvious that the command-and-control method of industrial modernization, in particular, construction in order to reduce the negative impact on the environment and the introduction of a carbon tax are not much associated with minimizing the risk in the field of environmental safety.
In lines 580-582, considering the impact of the necessary amount of funds in the probability and continuing planning and asset management, it is necessary to discuss the impact of the safety culture and other factors such as trainning, human reability, environmental conditions, experience among others.
Ok. The probability of an accident in the technical safety system, its value depends on the amount of funds s1 allocated for the prevention of accidents and measures to ensure environmental safety. During the construction of objects, the following risks are possible: insufficient analysis and assessment of information about the object before the start of design; unprocessed tasks in the Terms of Reference for the design of the facility; changes in the design process; excess of the project budget; approval of the project and introduction of changes; ensuring the safety of the facility during the period of its construction and subsequent operation, inadequacy of the calendar-network construction schedule; incorrect logistics of the construction site, irrational use of the territory, etc. There can be a lot of factors for understanding the key risks of construction projects, depending on the production practice in a particular country. In Russia, the influence of safety culture and other factors such as training, human reliability, environmental conditions, experience among other things, on ensuring environmental safety is insignificant, therefore, assessing it, if not impossible, is extremely problematic. There are poor quality of building materials, ill-conceived paradigm of the urban planning environment, high economic risk, unsettled legal framework and lack of own funds of construction enterprises, underdeveloped investment infrastructure. All this impedes the development of safety culture in Russia. For this reason, its analysis was not included in the study plan. Various options are currently being proposed for introducing a safety culture (for example, setting up training safety parks).
The results are interesting, but strongly descriptive, lacking in analytical content indexing to the optimization of environmental safety in the field of construction and housing and communal services study. In order to improve the quality of communication, the authors may analyze the alternative of reducing the content presented in the article original form, in an objective way, sending some graphic elements and corresponding secondary quantitative analyzes to an appendix, in order to make the text cleaner and more objective.
Ok. To improve the quality of communication, the authors analyzed the alternative of reducing the content presented in the article original form, in an objective way, sending graphic elements (Fig. 2, 5, 6, 11-14, 15, 16) and corresponding secondary quantitative analyzes (Tabl. 1 and 2) to an appendix, in order to make the text cleaner and more objective.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for your manuscript, it is interesting, but I have some suggestions and comments:
Please rewrite the abstract - explain why you are choosing this topic, why it is so actual.
The introduction part is an introduction part, so please keep this line: actuality, the main problem, what you want to do in your study, and which kind of methods will you use.
At this moment the literature review is a part of your introduction section.
The structure of this paper is not correct, please take a look at the published papers of this journal.
The introduction section has to be not so long and very clear; after will goes the Literature review, then the Methodology sections, the Results, the Discussion part, and the Conclusions.
In my opinion, there are so many footnotes, maybe all these explanations you can give as Annex or Appendix
Some formulas lost the numbering, please check it.
Maybe in figure 5, you can present in another way... That all these scenarios will be in one picture. The same and with the picture 6.
In my opinion it will be great that you explain the result of 7 and 8 picture.
For me is very strange that you in one picture want to present different data, for example, 9 and 10 pictures (and in previously the same). Just please rethink this moment.
And please insert all needed information before references.
Author Response
Reviewer 3
Dear Authors,
thank you for your manuscript, it is interesting, but I have some suggestions and comments:
Please rewrite the abstract - explain why you are choosing this topic, why it is so actual.
Thank you for your careful and detailed analysis of our article.
Ok. The abstract is rewritten.
The introduction part is an introduction part, so please keep this line: actuality, the main problem, what you want to do in your study, and which kind of methods will you use.
At this moment the literature review is a part of your introduction section.
The structure of this paper is not correct, please take a look at the published papers of this journal.
Ok. The structure of this paper is corrected.
The introduction section has to be not so long and very clear; after will goes the Literature review, then the Methodology sections, the Results, the Discussion part, and the Conclusions.
Ok. The introduction section is shorten and restructured to do more clearly.
In my opinion, there are so many footnotes, maybe all these explanations you can give as Annex or Appendix
Ok. The part of paper’ footnotes are given in Appendix.
Some formulas lost the numbering, please check it.
Ok. It is checked.
Maybe in figure 5, you can present in another way... That all these scenarios will be in one picture. The same and with the picture 6.
Ok. It is checked. Figures 5 and 6 are sent in Appendix.
In my opinion it will be great that you explain the result of 7 and 8 picture.
Ok. Using the Crystal Ball program (Oracle Crystal Ball Enterprise Performance Management, Ver. 11.1.2.4.850), we select the most suitable probability distribution for the specified data. At an academic and professional level, “Fit Distribution” tool is of great help for the creation of scenarios, it makes a previous selection of the data, assigns the most feasible probability distribution for the model that is being executed. It is a complete tool, capable of generating a summary of statistical data, goodness of fit tests, Chi-square, among others; reason why it is possible to compare and choose the distribution that best suits the optimization or minimization needs of the model.
Excel spreadsheets are great tools for analysis, but in their original application they have many limitations. The biggest limitation of Excel is that it only allows assigning a simple value to each cell; so to create scenarios you must manually change the value of each one. Crystal Ball improves Excel performance and allows you to set uncertain values for different cells, as well as to calculate their effect on each variable. For this Crystal Ball adds three new menus and a new toolbar to Excel.
To perform “Fit Distribution”:
The first step to follow is to open the file in Excel, having the Crystal Ball bar active, and in the CBTools menu select “Fit Distribution”. There the Fit Distribution wizard is displayed, in step 1 of 2 all the distributions of the model are selected and then click on next. Then Crystal Ball permits to fit a probability distribution to certain data.
In step 2 the input options are selected, and the following steps are followed:
Click on the icon of the selected cells to locate the field where the data series are locat-ed.
Select the data, available in the Excel spreadsheet.
Click on the return icon to return to the tools dialog.
When the "Fit Distribution" tool is running, it assigns a column of data for each dis-tribution, and the best distribution is designated for the model design, according to user requirements. “Fit Distribution” tool simulates the best scenario for the model, iterating between the data and the assumption options. The results correspond to the specified data as such. Rank by goodness-of-fit statistic is highlighted in blue. The optimal distribution is marked in green (Figure 7).
Figure 7. “Fit Distribution” tool (Crystal Ball program, Ver. 11.1.2.4.850).
Using the "Fit Distribution" tool, we select the most suitable probability distribution for the specified data (Figures 8 and 9).
|
a) Logistic distribution with μ = 0,54 and s = 0,04 |
|
b) Parameters: Mode, 0,54; Mean, μ; and Scale, s > 0 |
Figure 8. Logistic distribution (for scenarios 1 and 2) during Monte Carlo simulation modelling.
|
a) Lognormal distribution with Mode = 0,39, μL = 0,51 and σL = 0,22 |
|
b) Parameters: Mode = 0,39. Mean, μL > 0; and Std. Dev., σL > 0 |
Figure 9. Lognormal distribution (for scenarios 3 and 4) during Monte Carlo simulation modelling.
The reliability of the selected distributions was proved by ranking according to the statistics of the degree of compliance (the Anderson-Darling, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the Pearson chi-square test were used). The distributions were also validated by the Shapiro-Wilk criterion.
For me is very strange that you in one picture want to present different data, for example, 9 and 10 pictures (and in previously the same). Just please rethink this moment.
Ok. The data as such are not presented in Fig. 9 (Graphical methods checking logistic distribution: Normal Distribution, Histogram and QQ-Plot chart) and 10 (Graphical methods checking lognormal distribution: Normal Distribution, Histogram and QQ-Plot chart). Figures illustrate graphical methods for testing logistic and lognormal distributions. The Shapiro-Wilk test checking confirms the correctness of the sample.
And please insert all needed information before references.
Ok. All needed information are inserted before references.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The article is written correctly. Its structure is as logical as possible.There is no news in it in the form of a new-modified option for the Monte Carlo
method. However, in the opinion of the reviewer it is not a necessary condition
for this type of article. The authors used Crystal Ball software. However, they
provided a mathematical formalization, such a procedure allows for a full
understanding of the method's operation mechanism. Very extensive literary
studies. Good collection of source materials for analysis. High-level
analyzes carried out. The results of the analyzes have been compiled
thoroughly, comprehensively and clearly. In the opinion of the reviewer,
this topic should be dealt with. At present, risk assessment is not as
popular as it was 10-15 years ago, but the risks and problems have not gone
away. The authors, recalling the Monte Carlo method, showed that there is
not always need to invent something new, it is enough to write correctly
using the already existing advanced computational techniques.
Author Response
The article is written correctly. Its structure is as logical as possible.
There is no news in it in the form of a new-modified option for the Monte Carlo method. However, in the opinion of the reviewer it is not a necessary condition for this type of article. The authors used Crystal Ball software. However, they provided a mathematical formalization, such a procedure allows for a full understanding of the method's operation mechanism. Very extensive literary studies. Good collection of source materials for analysis. High-level analyzes carried out. The results of the analyzes have been compiled thoroughly, comprehensively and clearly. In the opinion of the reviewer, this topic should be dealt with. At present, risk assessment is not as popular as it was 10-15 years ago, but the risks and problems have not gone away. The authors, recalling the Monte Carlo method, showed that there is not always need to invent something new, it is enough to write correctly using the already existing advanced computational techniques.
Ok. Thank you very much for your high-level assessment of our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for your corrections.
