Investigating risk of bridge construction project: exploring Suramadu strait- crossing cable-stayed bridge in Indonesia Citation for the final version: Ongkowijoyo, Citra S., Gurmu, Argaw and Andi, Andi 2020, Investigating risk of bridge construction project: exploring Suramadu strait-crossing cable-stayed bridge in Indonesia, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, pp. 1-16. Available in its final form at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-03-2020-0018 This is the accepted manuscript. ©2020, Emerald Publishing Limited This peer reviewed accepted manuscript is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No-Derivatives 4.0 Licence. Downloaded from DRO: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30140524 DRO Deakin Research Online, Deakin University’s Research Repository Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code: 00113B International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment Page 1 of 30 International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 1 2 1 INVESTIGATING RISK OF BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT: EXPLORING 3 4 2 SURAMADU STRAIT-CROSSING CABLE-STAYED BRIDGE IN INDONESIA 5 3 6 7 4 PURPOSE. The complexities in strait-crossing cable-stayed bridge project increasing the risks. This 8 9 5 research focuses on identifying and analyzing the significant and worth-considered construction risks of 10 11 6 the first, biggest and longest-span of the strait-crossing bridge project in Indonesia. 12 7 DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH. As many as 32 risk events were identified and determined 13 14 8 as the risks that exist and can be represented in the Suramadu bridge project context. Data was collected 15 16 9 through a design-based questionnaire disseminated to experts involved in the project as well as semi- 17 18 10 formal interviews. Several quantitative methods were applied to analyze the significant risks, such as; 19 11 Relative Importance Index, Spearman’s rank correlation test, and the Mann-Whitney U test. 20 21 12 FINDINGS. The analyses reveal that ‘Unexpected natural behavior’ confirmed by both contractor and 22 23 13 consultant parties as the most significant and crucial risk event. Another risk event found to be significant 24 14 is the ‘Delayed payment’. On the other hand, it is also found that several risks within the legal category 25 26 15 are found to be less significant compared to other major risk events. 27 28 16 RESEARCH LIMITATION. The results of the present research should be interpreted in the context of 29 30 17 several limitations. Given these possible concerns regarding the generalisability of the findings, along 31 18 with the relativity low rate of a participant in the current research, additional studies are needed to provide 32 33 19 a more complete picture of stakeholder perceptions who involve directly in the construction environment 34 35 20 as well as to identify more construction risks specifically in the large-scale bridge project. 36 37 21 PRACTICAL IMPLICATION. This research has provided fundamental contributions to the body of 38 22 knowledge and practical implication to promote and assists decision-makers towards developing a 39 40 23 comprehensive risk assessment of large-scale bridge project. 41 42 24 ORIGINALITY/VALUE. The analysis outcomes and discussion, as well as the findings of this 43 25 research, have shedded lights on the construction risks understanding which contributes to delivering a 44 45 26 theoretical framework for achieving large-scale bridge project success. 46 47 27 KEYWORDS: Infrastructure, construction project, risk analysis, Suramadu bridge, megaproject. 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 1 | P a g e 60 International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment Page 2 of 30 1 2 3 4 29 INTRODUCTION 5 6 30 Public infrastructure such as bridge plays a significant role as the backbone of society. A bridge refers to 7 8 31 an engineering structure that is constructed to maintain the functions of railroads, roads, and waterways. 9 10 11 32 Not to mention, bridge structure also supports and provides modern society needs and services 12 13 33 respectively. In fact, a bridge is essential to enable sustain and enhance community living conditions as 14 15 34 well as economic stability. Accordingly, regardless funded by the public or private institution, the 16 17 18 35 development of bridge in various sectors is developed rapidly in every country. 19 20 36 To meet current modern and vast society demand, the longer span bridge projects are increasingly 21 22 37 constructed worldwide. The construction of a long-span bridge is considered enormously complex, a 23 24 38 daunting task and as a risky business. The complexity arises from its’; (i) project scale, (ii) ‘technical 25 26 27 39 structures’ cost, and (iii) the involvement of many contracting parties such as; owners, designers, 28 29 40 contractors, subcontractors and suppliers. Further, the complexity also emerges from the internal project 30 31 41 team that is assembled from different countries, companies, and cultures. 32 33 34 42 This leads that the bridge project requires larger and long-term financing scheme with various 35 36 43 stakeholders involved and influenced by various aspects. In this way, it is inarguably that the 37 38 44 complexities increasing the risks affected the project, particularly within the construction phase. Project 39 40 41 45 risk can be defined as an uncertain event or condition that-if it occurs-has a positive or negative effect 42 43 46 on at least one project objective, such as; time, cost, scope, or quality . 44 45 47 In the view of construction context, construction risks are viewed as unexpected events which 46 47 48 result in a cost overrun or schedule delay (Wang and Chou 2003). As such, inadequately dealt and 48 49 50 49 mismanaged construction risks have been shown to cause inefficiencies in particular project and make 51 52 50 contract relationships adversarial (Andi 2006, Mousavi, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam et al. 2011). Moreover, 53 54 51 the inherent risks exert significant disruption and have negative consequences on project success. 55 56 57 58 59 2 | P a g e 60 International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment Page 3 of 30 International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 1 2 52 Therefore, achieving large-scale bridge project successes indeed a daunting task. In view of this, 3 4 53 the proper strategy to reach bridge project success is to comprehensively identify the most critical risks 5 6 7 54 and thus control them. On that account, this research aims to remedy this knowledge gaps by presenting 8 9 55 a risk analysis of bridge project by using the case study of the first, largest and longest strait-crossing 10 11 56 bridge project in Indonesia. 12 13 14 57 It is expected that this research will potentially benefit various stakeholders (e.g., the project 15 16 58 owners, contractors, sub-contractors and other stakeholders) involved towards understanding the 17 18 59 construction risk of the large-scale bridge project. By then, it is also expected that this research will 19 20 60 contribute to the implication for delivering both theoretical framework and practical tools for decision- 21 22 23 61 makers to measure the significant construction risks specifically in the large-scale bridge project. 24 25 62 LITERATURE REVIEW 26 27 63 According to the Oxford Handbook of megaproject management, megaprojects are large-scale, complex 28 29 30 64 ventures that typically cost $1 billion or more, take many years to develop and build, involving multiple 31 32 65 public and private stakeholders, are transformational, and impact millions of people (Flyvbjerg 33 34 66 2017). However, $1 billion are not a constraint in defining megaprojects. As such, megaproject can also 35 36 37 67 be referred to as the large-scale project which can be defined as a temporary endeavours characterized 38 39 68 by large investment commitment, vast complexity, and long-lasting impact on the economy, the 40 41 69 environment, and society (Brookes and Locatelli 2015). 42 43 70 On the other hand, conventional large-scale delivery is highly problematic with a dismal 44 45 46 71 performance record in terms of actual costs and benefits (Flyvbjerg 2014). Large-scale projects are 47 48 72 challenging, complex, and risky inherent with a large number of personnel, activities, interfaces, and 49 50 73 interdependencies (Jergeas and Ruwanpura 2010). Due to complexities of the construction environment, 51 52 53 74 an increase of size, large resource requirements, long time horizons and exposure to interrelated and 54 55 75 pervasive drivers of risk, large-scale project by their nature are faced with unique risks and tend to stretch 56 57 76 available resources to the limit and sometimes beyond during development. 58 59 60 3 | P a g e International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment Page 4 of 30 1 2 77 Trying to eliminate all risks in the large-scale project is impractical. Accordingly, effective risk 3 4 78 management is to recognize inherent risk events as organizing frames and the extent to which risk 5 6 7 79 analysis provides a window on mitigating the inherent risk and minimizing its impact. For that reason, 8 9 80 risk management in the project development process is required to reduce any possible optimism 10 11 81 bias and strategic misrepresentation, as a curious paradox exists in which more megaprojects are being 12 13 14 82 proposed despite their consistently poor performance against initial forecasts of budget, schedule, and 15 16 83 benefits (Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius et al.