CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE (CI) PROTECTION FOR FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT AND FLOOD VULNERABILITY INDEX IN SUNGAI PINANG, PULAU PINANG

Authors

  • Y F Wahab Malaysia Japan International Institute of Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
  • N E Alias Centre for Environmental Sustainability and Water Security (IPASA), Research Institute for Sustainable Environment (RISE), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
  • A Anuar Malaysia Japan International Institute of Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
  • S Taib Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor
  • K N Bashah Technology Development Sector, Construction Industry Development Board, Kuala Lumpur
  • N Baslan Centre of Built Environment, Construction Research Institute of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v35.19946

Keywords:

critical infrastructure; flood; risk; vulnerability; focus group discussion

Abstract

Infrastructure that is rated "critical" has a significant long-term impact on a large number of people when it fails.  This study's objective is to rank Sungai Pinang's Critical Infrastructure (CI) for flood risk assessment and vulnerability index. According to the literature research, there are seven (7) indicators that are linked to CI, including industrial areas, infrastructure and utilities, institutions and public facilities, commercial areas, transportation, residential areas, and open space and recreational areas. Experts from local governments and technical agencies in the state of Pulau Pinang that are concerned with and related to CI ranked the indicators during the focus group discussion. The most significant degree of CI was used to order these indicators. According to the results, residential areas received the maximum score of 165 points. With a total score of 160, institutions and public buildings are the second-ranked indicator. Infrastructure and utilities, which are ranked third, received 102 points, while transportation, which is ranked fourth, received 100 points. The fifth-ranked indication is commercial areas (65 marks). Open space and recreational areas are the indicator that came in sixth (64 marks). Industrial area ranks last among the indicators (58 marks).

References

Archabald K, Naughton-Treves L 2001. Tourism revenue-sharing around national parks in Western Uganda: early efforts to identify and reward local communities. Environmental Conservation. 282: 135-149

Hadi L A, Naim W M, Adnan N A, Nisa A, Said E S 2017. GIS Based Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Flood. Vulnerability Index Assessment. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering. 9-2: 7-11

Hajar Nasiri M 2016. An overview to flood vulnerability assessment methods. Sustainable Water Resources Management .23: 331-336

Malczewski, J 2006. GIS‐based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science. 207: 703-726

Mohd A M, Narimah S, Norzailawati M N 2016 Identifying Factors Influencing Urban Spatial Growth for the George Town Conurbation. Planning Malaysia: Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners. 14: 95-106

Saaty T L 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 153: 234-281

Saaty T L 1980 The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning Priority Setting Resource Allocation. New York: Mc Graw-Hill

Downloads

Published

2023-03-28

Issue

Vol. 35 No. 1: April 2023

Section

Articles

How to Cite

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE (CI) PROTECTION FOR FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT AND FLOOD VULNERABILITY INDEX IN SUNGAI PINANG, PULAU PINANG. (2023). Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, 35(1), 47-52. https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v35.19946