Retrospective document analysis uncovers significant risk heterogeneity and cross-group interactions in road construction, highlighting the need for coordinated preventive planning.
Road infrastructure risk management often relies on aggregate rankings that assume stable priorities across projects. This retrospective, document-based study examines between-project differences in risk structure and directed associations between primary and secondary risks within adverse events. The analysis uses 1177 consolidated analytical records of documented cost- and/or time-related adverse events from 28 completed road infrastructure projects implemented during the construction of Pan-European Corridor X and adjacent road infrastructure in Serbia. Primary-risk, secondary-risk, and joint primary–secondary edge profiles were compared using Jensen–Shannon divergence, permutation testing, empirical-Bayes adjustment, and a beta-binomial model. Directed network analysis identified source, receiver, and bridge roles among seven risk groups. Significant heterogeneity was found in all three profile types. At the record level, 69.8% of the 1053 records containing at least one secondary risk included a secondary risk from a different group, whereas at the link level, 53.8% of the 1717 directed group-level link occurrences were cross-group. Project documentation was the dominant source and bridge, generating 59.6% of cross-group links, whereas external factors were the largest receiver and had the highest authority score. The most frequent link, from project documentation to external factors, was not overrepresented after project-specific composition was preserved. Several less frequent links were significantly overrepresented, especially those connecting project-wide factors with employer-related risks. The findings support coordinated preventive planning. The proposed data-driven framework can support the development of digital decision-support systems for project-specific risk monitoring, coordinated preventive planning, and sustainable management of road infrastructure delivery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aleksandar Senić (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: