Identification of Industrial Occupational Safety Risks and Selection of Optimum Intervention Strategies: Fuzzy MCDM Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have reviewed the paper "Identification of Industrial Occupational Safety Risks and Selection of Optimum Intervention Strategies: Fuzzy MCDM Approach" and found it excellently written. Everything, from the methodology and structure to the contributions, is well-done. Additionally, the results are supported by both numerical evaluations and illustrative visuals. The conclusions are well-aligned with the obtained results.

In this case, I have these minor comments regarding the methodology and content to further enhance the readability of the paper:

 

In the abstract, the authors directly mentioned the use of their own method to solve the problem. However, I recommend that the authors briefly state what traditional methods are typically used and the challenges associated with them that led to this solution. The justification should not simply be that the method is novel or has not been used before but must be based on its necessity. This clarification should be succinctly included in the abstract.

In the introduction section, comment 1 must also be addressed, but in greater detail, by providing evidence through an analysis of the research gap and demonstrating how this has been addressed in the study.
Analyzing research gaps will justify the need for your contributions and also provide stronger support for them. Please ensure a clear linkage is provided between the research gaps and your contributions.

The formulas are extensive and numerous, and I believe readers might not pay attention to all the details. When possible, I recommend focusing only on the most important formulas, such as the final ones, without providing deep demonstrations. You can refer to existing references for detailed derivations.

Reduce the discussion of theoretical aspects from existing materials and concentrate on describing your contributions more explicitly.
The number of tables is quite high. If possible, reduce the number or find a simpler and more effective way to present the data.
If feasible, list the research gaps in the introduction before presenting the contributions. This addition would be very impactful.

Some of your references are quite dated (1965(1), 2001(1), 2004(1), 2005(1), 2011(1), 2012(1), 2013(1), 2016(3), 2018(2), 2019(3), 2020(5), 2021(3), 2022(2), 2023(9), 2024(9), 2025(1)). Please try to focus more on recent materials to enhance the relevance and impact of your work.

Other than these points, I found the paper well-written and have no further comments.

Author Response

Comment 1: In the abstract, the authors directly mentioned the use of their own method to solve the problem. However, I recommend that the authors briefly state what traditional methods are typically used and the challenges associated with them that led to this solution. The justification should not simply be that the method is novel or has not been used before but must be based on its necessity. This clarification should be succinctly included in the abstract.

Response 1: Thanks very much for your comment. We have addressed your comment and highlighted it in the abstract as follows.

Over 1.1 million deaths occur annually from workplace injuries and diseases, with higher risks in developing countries. Occupational safety studies commonly use quantitative or qualitative methods, but these often fail to address uncertainty.

Comment 2: In the introduction section, comment 1 must also be addressed, but in greater detail, by providing evidence through an analysis of the research gap and demonstrating how this has been addressed in the study. Analyzing research gaps will justify the need for your contributions and also provide stronger support for them. Please ensure a clear linkage is provided between the research gaps and your contributions.

Response 2: Thanks very much for your comment. We have addressed your comment in greater detail by adding additional studies that have been conducted by scholars but who doesn’t apply MCDM, which is one of the gaps. Also, in Libya, no study has been conducted related to the LISCO company which is another gap. The added part is highlighted in the introduction section as bellows.

Various studies on occupational injuries and safety risks have been conducted across Africa. In Ethiopia, Debela et al. [23] examined safety practices among workers in the Metehara and Wonji sugar industries using a mixed-methods approach. Barrow et al. [24] explored occupational hazards among fishermen in The Gambia, while Debela et al. [25] conducted a systematic review to identify regional factors influencing occupational injuries. In another study, Debela et al. [26] generated regional estimates of injuries across Africa’s construction, manufacturing, and mining sectors. However, none of these studies applied multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to address uncertainty, a key factor in timely safety implementation. Besides that, no study has assessed the occupational safety risks at LISCO, identifying primary hazards, and proposing targeted mitigation strategies using the MCDM approach. This research aims to fill these gaps.

Comment 3: The formulas are extensive and numerous, and I believe readers might not pay attention to all the details. When possible, I recommend focusing only on the most important formulas, such as the final ones, without providing deep demonstrations. You can refer to existing references for detailed derivations.

Response 3: Thanks very much for your comment. We have moved some equations into two new formed Appendix.

Comment 4: Reduce the discussion of theoretical aspects from existing materials and concentrate on describing your contributions more explicitly.

Response 4: Thanks very much for your comment. Based on it, we have tried to explicitly describe the contributions in our revised manuscript as follows.

• Implementation of an integrated MCDM approach to enhance understanding of occupational safety risks in Libya’s steel industry.
• Raising awareness among stakeholders about key safety risks and effective interventions.
• Offering a simple, step-by-step framework for tackling complex MCDM issues.
• Showcasing the method’s versatility for solving MCDM challenges in various fields.
• Providing a practical tool to support informed decision-making on workplace safety.

Comment 5: The number of tables is quite high. If possible, reduce the number or find a simpler and more effective way to present the data.

Response 5: We have reduced the number of Tables from 17 to 13. Also, some part of the calculations has been removed.

Comment 6: If feasible, list the research gaps in the introduction before presenting the contributions. This addition would be very impactful.

Response 6: Thanks very much for your comment. We have addressed the research gaps as follows in the introduction section as required.

However, none of these studies applied multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to address uncertainty, a key factor in timely safety implementation. Besides that, no study has assessed the occupational safety risks at LISCO, identifying primary hazards, and proposing targeted mitigation strategies using the MCDM approach. This research aims to fill these gaps.

Comment 7: Some of your references are quite dated (1965(1), 2001(1), 2004(1), 2005(1), 2011(1), 2012(1), 2013(1), 2016(3), 2018(2), 2019(3), 2020(5), 2021(3), 2022(2), 2023(9), 2024(9), 2025(1)). Please try to focus more on recent materials to enhance the relevance and impact of your work.

Response 7: We have added 20 references newer date.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article presents a comprehensive approach to managing occupational safety risks within the Libyan Steel Company (LISCO) by assessing the risks for occupational safety and providing a framework for selecting the most appropriate safety interventions using a Fuzzy MCDM method. This method uses the fuzzy Bonferroni mean aggregation operator to aggregate expert’s opinions. The model integrates a hierarchical structure within a fuzzy methodological framework, utilizing both WENSLO and ARTASI methods for the first time to identify industrial safety risks and select optimal intervention strategies. Here are some comments:

1.       It would be beneficial to introduce relevant background knowledge in additional section.

2.       The author should discuss the advantages of using fuzzy Bonferroni mean aggregation operator to aggregate expert’s opinions.

3.       The comparison of F-WENSLO model with other models are not presented in this article.

4.       Some related works are suggested to discuss, e.g., decision-making: Generalized divergence-based decision making method with an application to pattern classification.

5.       Figures 5 and 8 are not intuitive, please consider using other types of graphics to present.

6.       Please discuss in detail the research directions for future work.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research. 

Author Response

Comment 1: It would be beneficial to introduce relevant background knowledge in additional sections.

Response 1: Thanks very much for your comment. We have added section 1.2 Related studies.

In recent decades, awareness of occupational safety and health risks has significantly increased among stakeholders in the construction industry. For instance, Tamers et al. [27] outlined an integrated approach to worker safety and health, with key research priorities and next steps for practical applications. dos Santos Leite et al. [28] examined the impact of biomechanical, psychosocial, environmental, and individual factors on the development of work-related musculoskeletal disorder (WMSD) symptoms, both local and widespread, among workers in a footwear manufacturing company. Kukhar et al. [29] assessed the impact of adopting international health and safety practices on the effectiveness of safety management at an industrial firm. Gul [30] introduced a novel method for conducting risk assessments in occupational health and safety (OHS). Sousa et al. [31] used a quantitative model to analyze risk-based management practices in occupational safety and health within the construction industry. Guneri et al. [32] developed a fuzzy AHP framework to determine the optimal risk assessment methods (RAMs) for ensuring occupational safety (OS) in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Ilbahar et al. [33] employed an innovative integrated approach to assess risks in occupational health and safety. Gul et al. [34] evaluated the risks faced by healthcare staff, aiming to support health service planning and improve regulatory measures. Ozdemir et al. [35] introduced a risk assessment method for university laboratory operations. Gul [36] performed an in-depth, state-of-the-art review of OHS risk assessment research that utilizes MCDM-based methods. 

Comment 2: The author should discuss the advantages of using fuzzy Bonferroni mean aggregation operator to aggregate expert’s opinion.

Response 2: We have taken into account your suggestion about the advantages of the fuzzy Bonferroni mean operator. In the revision process, we elaborated why this operator is preferred for combining expert opinions and its advantages over other methods.

2.2 Fuzzy Bonferroni Mean Aggregation Operator

Aggregation operators, which are mathematical functions, aggregate group members' individual preferences, evaluations, or judgments to form a common conclusion throughout the group decision-making process. Among the various aggregation operators, the Bonferroni Mean (BM) operator stands out as a unique and powerful tool in accurately reflecting complex relationships and interactions in datasets. BM combines each data point by multiplying it by the average of the other values, and this process allows for more precise modelling of the interrelationships between individual arguments [46]. By taking into account the interactions of individual criteria, Bonferroni Meaning allows for more detailed and meaningful results in decision-making processes. This feature makes BM particularly valuable in the field of MCDM. Given that most other aggregation operators consider independent criteria, the exceptional ability of the BM operator to reflect the links between individual arguments makes it distinctly different [47]. The BM aggregation operator is based on fuzzy triangular numbers (TrFNs) operators and the operation of the TrFN. The Bonferroni Mean (TrFNBM) operator is provided by Eq. (3) [48]:  be a collection of TrFNs, then the TrFNBM operator.

Comment 3: The comparison of F-WENSLO model with other models are not presented in this article.

Response 3: Thank you for your feedback regarding the lack of comparison of our F-WENSLO model with other models. This comparison has been added to our study.

2.3 F- WENSLO Method for Prioritization of Criteria

Pamučar et al. [37] presented the WENSLO technique for determining weight coefficients of criterion (crisp version). Pamučar et al. [37], the results obtained with the WENSLO method are compared with several methods that are widely used in the determination of criteria weight coefficients. These methods include the ENTROPY method [49], the Criteria Importance Value through Inter-Criteria Correlation (CRITIC) method [50,51] and the Standard Deviation (StDev) approach [52]. Figure 2 shows the comparative results of the application of MCDM techniques.

Figure 2. Comparison with other methods for determining weight coefficients [27].

This comparison assessed the consistency and reliability of the WENSLO method with existing methods. The use of various methodologies confirms the robustness of the weights obtained with the WENSLO method and demonstrates the applicability and accuracy of the method in different decision-making contexts.

Comment 4: Some related works are suggested to discuss, e.g., decision-making: Generalized divergence-based decision making method with an application to pattern classification.

Response 4: We have added more than 20 references newer date including your suggested, which is added as [60].

The fact that the ranking of alternatives does not change in all scenarios supports the robustness and reliability of the decision-making process in terms of occupational safety management. This shows that decision makers can rely on the same strategies and make decisions with less uncertainty, regardless of the circumstances, because in such systems, the question of how to address uncertainty plays a significant role in the improvement of system performance in uncertainty reasoning, concluded in a study [60].

Comment 5: Figures 5 (6) and 8 (9) are not intuitive, please consider using other types of graphics to present.

Response 5: In line with your suggestion to improve the understandability of Figures 5 (6) and 8 (9), these graphics have been redesigned to make them more intuitive and visually effective.

……………..

Figure 6. Sensitivity analysis by varying the parameters  and

…………..

Figure 9. Importance ranking of criteria according to scenario

Comment 6: Please discuss in detail the research directions for future work.

Response 6: Thanks very much for your comment. The research discussions are detailed in the revised manuscript as follows.

Replicating this research framework in other steel-industrialized nations, such as South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, and Algeria, would provide comparative insights and enhance generalizability.

Future research could explore advanced extensions of fuzzy sets, including interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets, spherical fuzzy sets, Fermatean fuzzy sets, and Pythagorean fuzzy sets, to broaden the methodological scope.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have well addressed the comments that I presented. I recommend accepting this paper at its current form.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.