1 Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Munzur University, 62000, Tunceli, Turkey

2 Department of Industrial Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, 34349, Istanbul, Turkey


As wind energy is one of the most important renewable energy sources over the globe, need for increasing safety for this type of energy is gaining importance. Although this sector is not suffering an excessive amount of fatal injury accidents, there are many aspects open for improvements in occupational health and safety management. The construction and operation processes of wind turbines include several hazards that must be reduced. This study aims to present a risk assessment for the construction and operation period of wind tribunes using a new fuzzy based method. Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process, a common used multi criteria decision making method, is applied to assign weights to the parameters of Fine-Kinney risk analysis method. Then, fuzzy VIKOR method is used to prioritize hazards. A case study is carried out for an onshore wind turbine in Turkey by using occupational health and safety experts in weighting risk parameters and evaluating compromised rankings of the hazards. Results reveal the most important hazards both for construction and operation period of the wind tribune. On conclusion of the current study, control measures for those risks and possible corrective-preventive actions for improvement are also provided.

Graphical Abstract

An occupational risk assessment approach for construction and operation period of wind turbines


  • Two-stage fuzzy MCDM based risk assessment approach were followed in prioritization of hazards
  • The method eliminates deficiency of risk score evaluation by crisp numbers and decreases the inconsistency in decision making
  • The evaluations of risk parameters and ratings of hazards with respect to these parameters are made by judgements of experienced occupational experts under full consensus.
  • Different from a classical Fine-Kinney method, experts give criteria weights by pairwise comparison style of Buckley’s FAHP
  • To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first attempt in occupational risk assessment of both construction and operation period of wind turbines using a fuzzy hybrid approach.


Main Subjects

Adem, A.; Çolak, A.; Dağdeviren, M., (2018). An integrated model using SWOT analysis and Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set for evaluation occupational safety risks in life cycle of wind turbine. Saf. Sci., 106, 184-190 (6 pages).

Aikhuele, D.O., (2018). Intuitionistic Fuzzy Model for Reliability Management in Wind Turbine System. Appl. Comput. Inform., 1-19 (19 pages)

Akyuz, E.; Celik, E., (2015). A fuzzy DEMATEL method to evaluate critical operational hazards during gas freeing process in crude oil tankers. J. Loss. Prevent. Proc., (38): 243-253 (10 pages).

Akyuz, E.; Celik, M., (2016). A hybrid human error probability determination approach: The case of cargo loading operation in oil/chemical tanker ship. J. Loss. Prevent. Proc., (43): 424-431 (7 pages).

Akyuz, E., (2017). A marine accident analysing model to evaluate potential operational causes in cargo ships. Saf. Sci., (92): 17-25 (8 pages).

Aminbakhsh, S.; Gunduz, M.; Sonmez, R., (2013). Safety risk assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects. J Safety. Res., (46): 99-105 (6 pages).

Aneziris, O.N.; Papazoglou, I.A.; Psinias, A., (2016). Occupational risk for an onshore wind farm. Saf. Sci., (88): 188-198 (10 pages).

Arabian-Hoseynabadi, H.; Oraee, H.; Tavner, P.J., (2010). Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for wind turbines. Int. J. Elec. Power., 32(7): 817-824 (7 pages).

Ashrafi, M.; Davoudpour, H.; Khodakarami, V., (2015). Risk assessment of wind turbines: Transition from pure mechanistic paradigm to modern complexity paradigm. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., (51): 347-355 (8 pages).

Awasthi, A.; Kannan, G., (2016). Green supplier development program selection using NGT and VIKOR under fuzzy environment. Comput. Ind. Eng., (91): 100-108 (8 pages).

Buckley, J.J.; (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis, Fuzzy. Set. Syst., 17(3): 233–247 (14 pages).

Çelik, Ö.; Utlu, Z., (2013). Rüzgar enerji santrallerinde iş sağlığı ve güvenliği uygulamaları. Istanbul Aydin Üniversitesi Dergisi (İAÜD)., (19):57-64 (7 pages).

Chan, H.K.; Wang, X., (2013). Fuzzy extent analysis for food risk assessment. In Fuzzy Hierarchical Model for Risk Assessment. Springer., 89-114 (25 pages).

Chang, D.Y., (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 95(3): 649-655 (6 pages).

Chen, C.T., (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy. Set. Syst. 114(1): 1-9 (9 pages).

Dinmohammadi, F.; Shafiee, M., (2013). A fuzzy-FMEA risk assessment approach for offshore wind turbines. Int. J. Prog. Health. Manag., (4): 1-10 (10 pages).

Djapan, M.J.; Tadic, D.P.; Macuzic, I.D.; Dragojovic, P.D., (2015). A new fuzzy model for determining risk level on the workplaces in manufacturing small and medium enterprises. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. O., 229(5): 456-468 (12 pages).

Ebrahimnejad, S.; Mousavi, S.M.; Seyrafianpour, H., (2010). Risk identification and assessment for build–operate–transfer projects: A fuzzy multi attribute decision making model. Expert. Syst. Appl., 37(1): 575-586 (11 pages).

EU-OSHA – European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, (2013). Occupational safety and health in the wind energy sector: European Risk Observatory Report.

Fine, W.T., (1971). Mathematical evaluations for controlling hazards (No. NOLTR-71-31). NAVAL ORDNANCE LAB WHITE OAK MD.

Global Wind Energy Council, (2013). Global wind statistics | 2012.

Grassi, A.; Gamberini, R.; Mora, C.; Rimini, B., (2009). A fuzzy multi-attribute model for risk evaluation in workplaces. Saf. Sci., 47(5): 707-716 (19 pages).

Gul, M.; Ak, M.F.; Guneri, A.F., (2016). Occupational health and safety risk assessment in hospitals: A case study using two-stage fuzzy multi criteria approach. Hum. Ecol. Risk. Assess., 23(2): 187-202 (15 pages).

Gul, M.; Celik, E.; Aydin, N.; Gumus, A.T.; Guneri, A.F., (2016). A state of the art literature review of VIKOR and its fuzzy extensions on applications. Appl. Soft. Comput., 46: 60-89 (29 pages).

Gul, M.; Guneri, A.F., (2016). A fuzzy multi criteria risk assessment based on decision matrix technique: A case study for aluminum industry. J. Loss. Prevent. Proc., (40): 89-100 (11 pages).

Gul, M., (2018). A review of occupational health and safety risk assessment approaches based on multi-criteria decision-making methods and their fuzzy versions. Hum. Ecol. Risk. Assess., 1-38 (38 pages).

Gumus, A.T.; Yayla, A.Y.; Çelik, E.; Yildiz, A., (2013). A combined fuzzy-AHP and fuzzy-GRA methodology for hydrogen energy storage method selection in Turkey. Energies., 6(6): 3017-3032 (15 pages).

Guo, H.; Watson, S.; Tavner, P.; Xiang, J., (2009). Reliability analysis for wind turbines with incomplete failure data collected from after the date of initial installation. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 94(6): 1057-1063 (6 pages).

Hu, A.H.; Hsu, C.W.; Kuo, T.C.; Wu, W.C., (2009). Risk evaluation of green components to hazardous substance using FMEA and FAHP. Expert. Syst. Appl., 36(3): 7142-7147 (5 pages).

John, A.; Paraskevadakis, D.; Bury, A.; Yang, Z.; Riahi, R.; Wang, J., (2014). An integrated fuzzy risk assessment for seaport operations. Saf. Sci., (68): 180-194 (14 pages).

Kaassis, B.; Badri, A., (2018). Development of a Preliminary Model for Evaluating Occupational Health and Safety Risk Management Maturity in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Saf., 4(1): 1-5 (5 pages).

Kinney, G.F.; Wiruth, A.D., (1976). Practical risk analysis for safety management [Final Report].

Kucukali, S., (2016). Risk scorecard concept in wind energy projects: An integrated approach. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., (56): 975-987 (12 pages).

Kutlu, A.C.; Ekmekçioğlu, M., (2012). Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert. Syst. Appl., 39(1): 61-67 (6 pages).

Liu, H.T., Tsai, Y.L., (2012). A fuzzy risk assessment approach for occupational hazards in the construction industry. Saf. Sci., 50(4): 1067-1078 (11 pages).

Mahdevari, S.; Shahriar, K.; Esfahanipour, A., (2014). Human health and safety risks management in underground coal mines using fuzzy TOPSIS. Sci. Total. Environ., (488): 85-99 (14 pages).

Opricovic, S., (1998). Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering., 2(1): 5-21 (16 pages).

Rideout, K.; Copes, R.; Bos, C., (2010). Wind turbines and health. National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health.

Samantra, C.; Datta, S.; Mahapatra, S.S., (2016). Analysis of occupational health hazards and associated risks in fuzzy environment: a case research in an Indian underground coal mine. Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf. Promot., 24(3): 311-327 (16 pages).

Shafiee, M.; Dinmohammadi, F., (2014). An FMEA-based risk assessment approach for wind turbine systems: a comparative study of onshore and offshore. Energies., 7(2): 619-642 (23 pages).

Shafiee, M., (2015). A fuzzy analytic network process model to mitigate the risks associated with offshore wind farms. Expert. Syst. Appl., 42(4): 2143-2152 (9 pages).

TWEA., (2015). Turkish Wind Energy Statistics Report.

Tzeng, G.H.; Huang, J.J., (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. CRC Press. 

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.