Long Chen and Shuai Yang
Guangzhou Institute of Physical Education, Guangzhou, China
Large scale sports events bring all kinds of opportunities, but also contain huge risks. Therefore, risk management measures in the operation of sports events is important, and risk assessment is a significant part of risk management. It is indispensable to select risk factors that have a greater impact on the event risk and analyze their impact on the event risk and the degree of impact. In this paper, the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is used to study the risk assessment. Through the identification of risk factors, the modeling of analytic hierarchy process, the construction of fuzzy evaluation matrix and the ranking of risk factors, the importance ranking of risk factors in the operation of large-scale sports events is realized. Aiming at the fuzziness of people's judgment reflected by fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, a research method of risk assessment of large-scale sports events based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is proposed. Through a series of steps of risk identification and risk assessment of sports events, the risk assessment of sports events is realized. Event risk factors, modeling of AHP structure, building of fuzzy judgment matrix and ranking of event risk factors. Importance ranking of risk factors. The experimental results show that the consistency ratio CR = CI / RI = = 0.0193 / 0.58 = 0.033 < 0.1, the judgment matrix has good consistency, which shows the feasibility in the risk assessment of large-scale sports events.
Large Scale Sports Events, Risk Assessment, Model Analytic Hierarchy Process, Risk Management
Long Chen and Shuai Yang. Risk Assessment of Large-Scale Sports Events Based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Sports Technology (2020), Vol. 1, Issue 4: 40-55. https://doi.org/10.38007/IJST.2020.010404.
 Mittal K, Tewari P C, Khanduja D. Productivity improvement under manufacturing environment using Shainin system and fuzzy analytical hierarchy process: a case study. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2017, 92(1-4):407-421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0123-6
 Hamed K, Heydar B. Optimum mining method selection using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process-Qapiliq salt mine, Iran. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2015, 25(2):225-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2015.02.010
 Wu C, Liu G, Huang C, et al. Ecological Vulnerability Assessment Based on Fuzzy Analytical Method and Analytic Hierarchy Process in Yellow River Delta.. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2018, 15(5):855. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050855
 Lan S, Zhang H, Zhong R Y, et al. A customer satisfaction evaluation model for logistics services using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2016, 116(5):1024-1042. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0389
 Fedrizzi M, Krejčí J. A Note on the Paper “Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process: Fallacy of the Popular Methods”. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 2015, 23(06):965-970. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488515500440
 Jaiganesh M, Sivakami R, Kumar A V A. Secure isolation of cloud consumers legitimacy using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The Journal of Analysis, 2019, 27(2):311-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41478-018-0127-0
 Dayanandan U, Kalimuthu V. Software Architectural Quality Assessment Model for Security Analysis Using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) Method. 3d Research, 2018, 9(3):31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13319-018-0183-x
 Du X, Zhou K, Yao C, et al. Application of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and prediction-area (P-A) plot for mineral prospectivity mapping: a case study from the Dananhu metallogenic belt, Xinjiang, NW China. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2016, 9(4):298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-016-2316-y
 Meng Q, Miao F, Zhen J, et al. GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping with logistic regression, analytical hierarchy process, and combined fuzzy and support vector machine methods: a case study from Wolong Giant Panda Natural Reserve, China. Bulletin of Engineering Geology & the Environment, 2016, 75(3):923-944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-015-0786-x
 Tang J W, Hsu T H. Utilizing the Hierarchy Structural Fuzzy Analytical Network Process Model to Evaluate Critical Elements of Marketing Strategic Alliance Development in Mobile Telecommunication Industry. Group Decision & Negotiation, 2018, 27(2):251-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-018-9554-1
 Rahimianzarif E, Moradi M. Designing Integrated Management Criteria of Creative Ideation Based on Fuzzy Delphi Analytical Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2017, 20(4):1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-017-0370-6
 An T N, Long D N, Long L H, et al. Quantifying the complexity of transportation projects using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Project Management, 2015, 33(6):1364-1376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.02.007
 Ashtiani M, Azgomi M A. Trust modeling based on a combination of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy VIKOR. Soft Computing, 2016, 20(1):399-421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-014-1516-1
 Tan J, Low K Y, Sulaiman N M N, et al. Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) for multi-criteria selection of microalgae harvesting and drying processes. Clean Technologies & Environmental Policy, 2016, 18(7):2049-2063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-016-1163-6
 Ravangard R, Bahadori M, Raadabadi M, et al. A Model for the Development of Hospital Beds Using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy AHP). Iranian Journal of Public Health, 2017, 46(11):1555-1562.
 Cheng J , Xu M , Chen Z . A Fuzzy Logic-Based Method for Risk Assessment of Bridges during Construction. Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology(New Series), 2019, 26(01):5-14.
 Ilbahar E, Karaşan A, Cebi S, et al. A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 2018, 103(3):124-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.025