E-ISSN:2250-0758
P-ISSN:2394-6962

Research Article

Risk Analysis

International Journal of Engineering and Management Research

2026 Volume 16 Number 3 June
Publisherwww.vandanapublications.com

Risk Analysis and Mitigation for a Concrete manufacturing Company in Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Oba KM1*
DOI:10.31033/IJEMR/16.3.2026.1918

1* Kenneth Miebaka Oba, Department of Civil Engineering, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

Risk is a likelihood of an adverse event to occur, thereby causing a negative impact. This paper studies a case of Okonto Concrete Manufacturing Company, located in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Flood disaster within and around the company’s plant site resulted in a chemical spill, which posed major risks cutting across aquatic life, health of staff and community residents, local authorities, and the company’s economic performance. An analysis of Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legislative, Environmental, and Competitive (PESLEC) risks was carried out. The risks were identified using Ishikawa’s (fishbone) diagram. The PESTLEC analysis and mitigation resulted in recommended actions to be taken with those to be responsible for each action, at various timelines. The analysis and mitigation plans were designed for a period of one year, within which the company would be able to recover and address major staff, community, and government concerns. However, this research recommends further studies to address full disaster recovery plan to ensure complete restoration of the company’s value chain.

Keywords: Concrete Manufacturing, Flood Disaster, PESLEC Analysis, Risk Analysis, Risk Mitigation

Corresponding Author How to Cite this Article To Browse
Kenneth Miebaka Oba, Department of Civil Engineering, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
Email: 		Oba KM, Risk Analysis and Mitigation for a Concrete manufacturing Company in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Int J Engg Mgmt Res. 2026;16(3):66-70.
Available From
https://ijemr.vandanapublications.com/index.php/j/article/view/1918

Manuscript Received Review Round 1 Review Round 2 Review Round 3 Accepted
2026-05-06 2026-05-21 2026-06-08
Conflict of Interest Funding Ethical Approval Plagiarism X-checker Note
None Nil Yes 4.11

© 2026 by Oba KM and Published by Vandana Publications. This is an Open Access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ unported [CC BY 4.0].

Int J Engg Mgmt Res 2026;16(3)66
Download PDFBack To Article1. Introduction2. Methodology3. Results4. Conclusion
Oba KM. Risk Analysis and Mitigation

1. Introduction

Okonto Concrete Manufacturing Company produces concrete in commercial quantities, which are distributed throughout Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital, in Nigeria. The company has a concrete manufacturing plant situated outside in the Port Harcourt and is relatively close to three housing estates and a small village, which in total have a population of 3,000 people. A major river also passes directly alongside the plant site boundary. The river is a successful habitat for salmon and other species of wildlife. Concrete manufacturing is the central and the most profitable part of the Okonto concrete manufacturing company’s business without which it would be difficult to survive. The manufacturing plant has been in its current location for over 20 years and is a prime location because of a major road utilized to transport raw materials such as sand, cement, granite, and chemicals such as admixtures, as well as finished products (concrete).

Recently, unusually heavy rains have caused the river to overflow its banks. This flooded the site and caused a large chemical leak from the company’s storage tanks into the river. As a result, a section of the local community has been quite vocal with their objection to the company’s continued presence at the site. However, because the company employs approximately 1,250 persons the majority of whom are from the nearby residential areas, there is a general tolerance to the company’s business. Whilst the local authority would prefer the company to relocate, they cannot enforce the move through the planning laws as the site carries immunity. They are also acutely aware of the company’s contribution to the area as a major employer. This problem of risks from the company’s workforce, neighbouring community, and government, can also have an adverse effect on the company’s economic performance.

A study carried out by [1] was focused on a comprehensive review of flood management and various approaches to address the risks involved. Their study recommended social and environmental aspects of flood management, and how the flood management factors can be evaluated in terms of risk. [2] also highlighted some international best practices in flood risk management strategies in Nigeria.

They recommended stakeholder collaboration, adoption of innovative flood risk adaptation strategies, investment in flood risk research, strengthening of institutional framework, and increased public awareness and education on flood risks in Nigeria. While previous studies have addressed flood related risks, none has addressed them politically, socially, economically, environmentally, competitively, technologically, and legally in a wholistic manner, in any construction related sector of Nigeria. This gap will be addressed by identifying the risks, and qualitatively analysing them using the Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legislative, Environmental, and Competitive (PESTLEC) analysis. This concept has been used by several researchers [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] to analyse and manage risks.

Risk is an uncertain effect on project performance [9]. It can be defined as the combination of two variables: the probability that an adverse event will occur and the impact it will have on the goals of the business [10]. The significant risks faced by an organization should be reviewed, examining the risks acceptable, the likelihood of their materializing, and the ability to reduce their impact if they do occur, also bearing in mind the costs and benefits of particular controls [11]. Risk Identification (or profiling or perception) is the subjective judgment that people make about the characteristics and severity of a risk [12]. Projects are exposed [13] to both internal risks (financial, design, contractual, construction, personal, involved parties and operational risks) and external risks (economic, social, political, legal, public, logistical and environmental risks). Hence risks should be analysed and mitigated both internally and externally.

2. Methodology

The risk involved in this case study is a fundamental static risk, since it occurred in a society, and is a natural disaster, such that the concerned individuals or firm has little or no control over it. The steps to be taken are: Profiling or identification of the risks; assessment and analysis; and mitigation.

A. Risk Identification and Profiling

To identify the risks the Ishikawa (fishbone) cause – and – effect diagram as shown in Figure 1 was used for the following categories:


Int J Engg Mgmt Res 2026;16(3)67
Oba KM. Risk Analysis and Mitigation

ijemr_1918_01
Figure 1: Ishikawa (Fishbone) Diagram

ijemr_1918_02
Figure 2: Probability Impact Matrix to Prioritize the Risks

B. Risk Assessment and Analysis

The method of analysis used is the qualitative risk analysis approach. This approach involves considering each risk in a purely descriptive manner to imagine various characteristics and the effect that it might have on the project or organisation. The qualitative analysis approach used is the PESTLEC analysis to tackle the external risks. This is an acronym described as:

Political
Economic
Social
Technological
Legislative
Environmental
Competitive

This analysis shall provide mitigation within one year. Within that period, the company will be able to gradually recover from the disasters and the economic downturn, as well as win more customers.

3. Results

The PESTLEC analysis in Table 1 below gives an analysis of the risks, showing the likelihoods, categories, impacts, and the possible mitigation routes.

Table 1: PESTLEC risk analysis table

ijemr_1918_Table01.png

A. Risk Mitigation

The last step taken in the risk management process is the mitigation. Table 2 gives details of the mitigation actions, as well as, who should be responsible for what action, and at what point should each mitigation process or action take place. This has been [14] as a result of working through each of the threats and opportunities identified and recorded earlier.


Int J Engg Mgmt Res 2026;16(3)68
Oba KM. Risk Analysis and Mitigation

Table 2: Risk mitigation and register

ijemr_1918_Table02.png

4. Conclusion

The flood disaster that befell Okonto concrete manufacturing company’s plant site encountered risks capable of crumbling the company’s business. This study has provided a risk management solution by way of applying the PESTLEC analysis. The risks were identified using Ishikawa’s (fishbone) diagram. The assessment and mitigation were carried out with recommended responsible personnel, actions and timelines. These solutions were designed for a period of one year, within which the company is expected to gradually recover as well as settle staff, community and government concerns. However, the value chain of the company is also at a major risk. This was not fully addressed in this study. It is therefore recommended that further studies be carried out to address a comprehensive disaster recovery plan, in order to revitalise the company’s value chain.

References

[1] M. A. U. R. Tariq, R. Farooq, & N. Van De Giesen. (2020). A critical review of flood risk management and the selection of suitable measures. Applied Sciences, 10(3), 8752. DOI: 10.3390/app10238752.

[2] S. W. Johnbull, E. Chinem, & T. D. Ikiriko. (2024). Adapting to flood risks in a changing climate: Best practices and innovations. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM), 6, 225. DOI: 10.35629/5252-0601225246.

[3] P. P. Morita, S. Abhari, J. Kaur, M. Lotto, P. A. D. S. E. S. Miranda, & A. Oetomo. (2023). Applying ChatGPT in public health: A SWOT and PESTLE analysis. Frontiers Media SA. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1225861.

[4] M. Mihailova. (2020). The state of agriculture in Bulgaria-PESTLE analysis. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 26(5), 935–943. Accessed: Jun. 07, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.lex.bg/laws/

[5] H. V. Belsare. (2025). PESTLE analysis. Int. J. Adv. Res. (Indore)., 13(02), 608–612. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/20411.

[6] S. Achinas, J. Horjus, V. Achinas, & G. J. W. Euverink. (2019). A PESTLE analysis of biofuels energy industry in Europe. Sustainability, 11(21), 5981. DOI: 10.3390/SU11215981.

[7] J. Song, Y. Sun, & L. Jin. (2017). PESTEL analysis of the development of the waste-to-energy incineration industry in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 80, 276–289. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.066.

[8] C. Zalengera, R. E. Blanchard, P. C. Eames, A. M. Juma, M. L. Chitawo, & K. T. Gondwe. (2014). Overview of the Malawi energy situation and A PESTLE analysis for sustainable development of renewable energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 38, 335–347. DOI: 10.1016/J.RSER.2014.05.050.

[9] C. Chapman & S. Ward. (2026). Project risk management. process, techniques and insights. (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. Accessed: Jun. 07, 2026. [Online]. Available: http://www.amazon.com/gp/sitbv3/reader/104-0890916-9048748?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=0471958042

[10] S. S. Bonham. (2008). Actionable strategies through integrated performance, process, project, and risk management. Artech House.

[11] J. Pickford. (2026). Mastering risk: Concepts. Hallow: Financial Times


Int J Engg Mgmt Res 2026;16(3)69
Oba KM. Risk Analysis and Mitigation

Prentice Hall, 2001. Accessed: Jun. 07, 2026. [Online]. Available: http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Mastering_Risk.html?id=GoeOG_iIB00C&pgis=1

[12] R. Singh, & A. Bhowal. (2011). Development of marketing‐driven measure of risk perception. The Journal of Risk Finance, 12(2), 140–152. DOI: 10.1108/15265941111112857.

[13] N. Van Thuyet, S. O. Ogunlana, & P. Kumar Dey. (2007). Risk management in oil and gas construction projects in Vietnam. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 1(2), 175–194. DOI: 10.1108/17506220710761582.

[14] Martin. Loosemore, John. Raftery, Charlie. Reilley, & Dave. Higgon. (2012). Risk management in projects. (2nd ed.). Routledge. Accessed: Jun. 07, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.com/books/about/Risk_Management_in_Projects.html?id=iV4OpqFQiQgC

Disclaimer / Publisher's Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of Journals and/or the editor(s). Journals and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Int J Engg Mgmt Res 2026;16(3)70