Risk analysis on implementation of road maintenance project with STEPLE method in Badung, Bali

In the implementation of the road maintenance project always risks arise. These risks have an impact on stakeholders related to the execution of the project, the community of road users and the surrounding environment. These risks need to be studied, managed, and assessed as a risk-mitigation effort for stakeholders. As the case study is the district road maintenance project, in Badung regency of Bali. Descriptive method used in the study. Identification of variable risk used STEPLE (Social, Technology, Economy, Politics, Legal, and Environment) method. The factors STEPLE is identified through literature review and brainstorming, then used as a questionnaire instrument. Respondents are experts involved in road maintenance projects in Badung regency. Risk assessment uses a risk assessment matrix. The results of the study found 36 risks. These risks are identified as dominant from the Technical variable that is 13 risks. Risk assessment found is 6 risks classified as unacceptable, and 30 risk classified as undesirable.


Introduction
Economic activity in Badung Regency is very high compared to regencies and cities in Bali Province. The road network infrastructure in Badung Regency is also a connecting road/ connector for one regency with other regencies, for example with Tabanan Regency, Gianyar Regency, and Denpasar City. Due to the economic life cycle during operation, this road infrastructure has decreased service levels due to damage to the road structure. To keep the damage level from getting worse, and to improve road services, this road infrastructure needs maintenance. However, during the construction period, it often causes negative impacts/ risks on stakeholders and the surrounding environment [1][2][3][4][5].
Regency is a tourism area and the high social, religious negative impact or risk needs mitigation efforts. However, before mitigation efforts are carried out, it is necessary to identify the dominant risk factors in the implementation of this road maintenance project. Until now, the dominant risks during the maintenance period of roads specifically in the district roads in Badung Regency have not been studied in advance, so it needs to be investigated. Method analysis of risk, especially at the risk identification stage that is developing at this time, and related to stakeholders is a Political, Economic, Social, Environment, Legal or known as PESTLE analysis [6][7][8]. This PESTLE method will be used in risk identification in this study. This is based on the suitability of the case studies studied which fulfill the political, economic, social, environmental, and legal aspects.

Methodology
Descriptive method was used in this study [9,10]. The execution period of the Road maintenance project in Bandung Regency was used as a study case. The research framework analysis is shown in Fig. 1.

Respondents
The respondent's determination method used nonprobability purposive sampling, based on expert judgment. The respondent's criteria were found based on the expertise possessed by the respondents regarding the care of the district road.

Frequency and consequences scale measurement
The scale used to measure the level of assessment of respondents is a Likert scale in the form of an ordinal scale that shows the level/ ranking of responses from respondents to the risks identified and does not indicate how much distance (interval) between levels of one another [9,10]. Table 1. Level and frequency scale (Likelihood).

Frequency level Scale
Very often 5 Often 4 Sometimes 3

Rarely 2
Very rare 1 Table 2. Consequences and levels. The Likert scale generally uses a rating of five rating, namely, strongly agree (5), agree (4), uncertain (3), disagree (2), and strongly disagree (1) where this scale can be used to indicate the level/ ranking of responses from respondents to identify risks. The frequency and consequence measurement scale is presented in Table 1 and 2 [10,11].

Risk matrix
The risk acceptability level is extended out a risk matrix analysis. The value of risk from the risk matrix is the result of the multiplication of the tendency (likelihood) with consequences. The outcomes of the risk matrix are categorized in the degree of risk acceptance as in Table 3 [12]. Table 3. Risk acceptance scale.

Acceptance of risk
Risk acceptance scale (X) 3 Results and discussion

Risk identification
The identified risks associated with project risks are from some previous researchers such as Wideman (1992), Shen (2001), Fisk (1997), Al-Bahar [13,14], and brainstorming found 45 risks. These risks found in groups based on the STEPLE category can be seen in Table  4. The number of respondents in the study was determined by the purposive sampling method as many as 24 respondents. There were 9 factors of invalid risk identified from validity and reliability test found as in Table 5. Invalid risks as in Table 5 are not included in the subsequent analysis. The risks that are further calculated are 36 risks, can be seen in Table Table 6 column (2). The number of each risk identified based on the STEPLE category is presented in Fig. 2. While the valid number of each category is presented in Fig. 3. Fig. 3. Valid risks (36 risks) resulting from method.

Results of risk assessment
The tabulation of data from the survey results for the perception of frequency (F) can be seen in Table 6 column (4), for consequences can be seen in Table 6 column (5). The results of the assessment matrix can be seen in Table 6 column (6). The results of the risk matrix founded 6 unacceptable and 30 undesirable risk. This risk is categorized as major risk requiring mitigation actions.

Conclusions
The risks identified during the execution of District road maintenance projects in Badung regency, Bali was found to be 36 risks. These six risks were found in the unacceptable category, such as the social risk that is equipment damage occurred, workplace accidents: technical risks that are results of field measurements were not according to plan, starting late implementation, getting picture details, economic risks that are limited short-term costs. The unacceptable risk is carried out in advance mitigation efforts such as planning costs, time, security, and safety.