INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 123
www.rsisinternational.org
Implementing the Interaction Matric Method for Impact Assessment in
Linear Infrastructure Project Planning: A Case Study of Route FT59
Jalan Tapah in Cameron Highlands, Malaysia
Siti Isma Hani Ismail
1
, Shanker Kumar Sinnakaudan
2
, Zulfairul Zakaria
3
, Loh Yong Seng
4
and Mohd
Fairuz Bachok
5
1
Civil Engineering Studies, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Cawangan Pulau
Pinang, Permatang Pauh Campus, 13500, Bukit Mertajam, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
2
Civil Engineering Studies, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Cawangan Pulau
Pinang, Permatang Pauh Campus, 13500, Bukit Mertajam, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
3
Civil Engineering Studies, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Cawangan Pulau
Pinang, Permatang Pauh Campus, 13500, Bukit Mertajam, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
4
School of Housing, Building, and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 USM, Pulau Pinang,
Malaysia
5
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA Johor Branch, 81750 Masai, Johor, Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.15020000010
Received: 12 February 2026; Accepted: 17 February 2026; Published: 25 February 2026
ABSTRACT
Inadequate road design and construction without impact assessment has a negative influence on human well-
being, as well as natural and non-living resources. It may have a number of detrimental effects on social and
economic concerns. Social Impact Assessments (SIAs) are used to analyze, anticipate, and evaluate the social,
economic, and environmental impacts on the impacted community. As a result, the purpose of this case study is
to gather information on how impact assessment is considered in linear infrastructure construction by collecting
census data for the route FT-59 Jalan Tapah, Cameron Highlands, Malaysia. All data was analyzed and presented
using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach and Microsoft Excel utilizing a weighted combination of
alternatives and criteria for ranking analysis. Results indicate the positive and negative impact of infrastructure
development from local viewpoints in terms of social, economic, and environmental aspects at the pre-
construction, construction, and operating phases. Furthermore, the results demonstrate the mitigation strategy
for infrastructure facility construction. This results implies that organizations' main SIA practitioners should
refer to this recommendation measure in order to enhance the outcome of SIA.
Keywords: Social Impact Assessment, Linear Infrastructure Development, Analytic Hierarchy Process, Road
Development in Cameron Highlands, Socio-economic and Environmental Impacts
INTRODUCTION
Malaysia is known as one of the countries that has made great progress toward becoming a developed nation.
The Malaysian government has planned the Eleventh Malaysia (Rancangan Malaysia Ke-11) to help realize its
successful ambition of becoming one of the world's most developed countries. Conducting a Social Impact
Assessment (SIA) for new road installation or rehabilitation projects appears to be critical in relieving the load
of already depleted capital. Each person who travels Route FT59 Jalan Tapah-Cameron Highlands has
encountered traffic-related issues and congestion.
Linear infrastructure development is a significant driver of economic growth in every country. Linear
infrastructure projects like roads, trains, tunnels, and pipelines are important. It may also improve social and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 124
www.rsisinternational.org
environmental welfare while promoting economic growth by providing fundamental services and facilities that
allow businesses to expand and thrive. The right quality and enough infrastructure amenities enable a high level
of life while also increasing productivity and efficiency. (Avinash Kaur & Rajinder Kaur, 2018). The poor
planning of infrastructure development has a negative impact on the local community. It is also a key driver of
economic growth in any region. Electricity, roads, water systems, public utilities, airports, trains, and telephones
are all critical services that fuel economic activity by facilitating commerce and transportation. Growing
urbanization in emerging nations will help to enhance infrastructure, such as transportation. Infrastructure
development refers to the provision of basic foundational services to stimulate economic growth and improve
quality of life. The efficiency of most modern economies has increased as a result of extensive infrastructure.
Social effect Assessment is a tool for identifying and managing the social effect of extractive industry projects.
The objective is to enhance positive outcomes while limiting negative ones. Integrating both environmental and
social impact assessments is a good approach. The development of a SIA, as well as the ongoing management
of social concerns throughout the project life cycle, rely on true community participation. The social impact
assessment procedure consists of four main parts. It begins with a detailed understanding of the issues and
opportunities, followed by an assessment of the projected consequences or contributions. The third phase
comprises designing strategies and developing mitigating measures. Monitoring and adaptive management are
the fourth and last phase.
DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY
Desk Study
A desk study was undertaken with a focus on the research region and the accompanying information obtained
throughout the research with the purpose of assessing the social effect of implementing linear infrastructure
projects. The survey and questionnaire methods were developed based on the information gathered.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 125
www.rsisinternational.org
Field Study
During this field research, all necessary data from the community and traders affected by the execution of linear
infrastructure development were gathered. The information was acquired by inspecting the project site and
visiting the zone of influence, which is within 0-1 km of the proposed road route.
Data Analysis Method
The data from the questionnaire was analyzed using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Analytical
Hierarchy Process is one of the most encompassing systems contained in MCDM. It is used to make judgments
with various criteria since it allows you to structure the problem in a hierarchical manner and trust in a
combination of quantitative and qualitative factors. The AHP approach has four key phases:
I. Build Hierarchy
II. Weighting of indicators by pair-wise comparison
III. Calculate the consistency ion criteria and alternatives
IV. Combine all the criteria and all the alternatives
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The table below illustrates the local influence on linear infrastructure development. The reliability study for the
outcomes was performed using the AHP approach, which integrated all criteria and alternatives. The ranking
will be based on the overall weighted value.
Pre- Construction Phase
Local impact on linear infrastructure development was assessed during the pre-construction phase. The reliability
study for the outcomes was performed using the AHP approach, which integrated all criteria and alternatives.
The ranking will be based on the overall weighted value.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 126
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 3.1: Ranking of positive Impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Employment
opportunities
Enhancement of
economic growth
Increasing of
tourism
revenues
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.15
0.22
0.24
0.22
3
Alternative 2
0.40
0.38
0.30
0.34
2
Alternative 3
0.45
0.40
0.46
0.44
1
Table 3.1 above shows the ranking total weight based on analysis for the beneficial impact on linear
infrastructure development to the community within the research region. Alternative 3 has the greatest overall
weight (0.44), while Alternative 1 has the lowest (0.22). The factors with the highest weight are job opportunities
(0.45), economic growth enhancement (0.40), and tourism income increase (0.46).
Table 3.2: Ranking of negative Impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Potential
displacement of
residents
Potential land
acquisition
The proposed
alignment
through
agricultural
areas
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.37
0.45
0.42
0.42
1
Alternative 2
0.3
0.21
0.36
0.3
2
Alternative 3
0.33
0.34
0.22
0.28
3
Table 3.2 illustrates the negative effects of total weight rank analysis for local impact on linear development
infrastructure facilities based on community feedback. The highest score (0.42) is on alternative 1, with the
criterion weights of (0.37) probable resident relocation, (0.45) potential land acquisition, and (0.42) planned
routing through agricultural districts.
During Construction and Operational Phase
The local impact of linear infrastructure development was investigated during the building and operational
phases. The reliability study for the outcomes was performed using the AHP approach, which integrated all
criteria and alternatives. The ranking will be based on the overall weighted value.
Table 3.3: Ranking of positive impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Employment
opportunities
Enhancement of
economic growth
Improvements
to the provision
of
infrastructure
facilities
/upgrading
existing
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.16
0.19
0.24
0.22
3
Alternative 2
0.29
0.39
0.36
0.35
2
Alternative 3
0.55
0.42
0.46
0.43
1
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 127
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 3.3 above demonstrates the favorable effects of total weights for local impact on linear infrastructure
development based on community feedback. Alternative 3 has the greatest overall weights (0.43), with values
of 0.55 for each criterion (job opportunities), 0.42 for economic growth, and 0.46 for improvements in
infrastructural facilities. In general, all respondents agree with choice 3 since the weight on each criterion is
larger than in the other alternatives.
Table 3.4: Ranking of negative impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Social cohesion/
community
severance
Expose to
traffic accidents/
hazard risk
Causes of traffic
problems and
congestions
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.35
0.27
0.35
0.32
3
Alternative 2
0.32
0.31
0.35
0.33
2
Alternative 3
0.33
0.42
0.30
0.35
1
Table 3.4 above illustrates the negative effects of total weights for local impact on linear development
infrastructure facilities resulting from community participation. Alternative 3 has the highest overall weights
(0.35), with values of (0.33) for social cohesiveness, (0.42) for exposure to traffic accidents, and (0.30) for
producing traffic difficulties and congestions.
Local Impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
The local impact on linear infrastructure development was assessed in terms of both positive and negative
community impacts. The reliability study for the outcomes was performed using the AHP approach, which
integrated all criteria and alternatives. The ranking will be based on the overall weighted value.
Table 3.5: Ranking positive impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Enhance the
local cultural
needs
Increase the level of
road safety to users
Increase of local
economy/economic
benefits
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.3
0.1
0.11
0.14
3
Alternative 2
0.33
0.3
0.34
0.32
2
Alternative 3
0.37
0.6
0.55
0.53
1
Table 3.5 above demonstrates the favorable effects of total weights for local impact on linear development
infrastructure facilities based on community feedback. Alternative 3 has the highest rank with total weights
(0.53), with values for each criterion (0.37) for enhancing local cultural requirements, (0.6) for increasing road
safety for users, and (0.55) for increasing local economy.
Table 3.6: Ranking negative impact on Linear Infrastructure Development
Increasing of
vehicles
Impact to air
quality & noise level
Physical
disruption
Total Weight
Rank
Alternative 1
0.1
0.28
0.22
0.33
2
Alternative 2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.26
3
Alternative 3
0.3
0.52
0.48
0.4
1
Table 3.6 above illustrates the negative effects of total weights for local impact on linear development
infrastructure facilities resulting from community participation. Alternative 3 has the greatest overall weight
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 128
www.rsisinternational.org
(0.40), with values of (0.3) for increased vehicle numbers, (0.52) for impact on air quality and noise levels, and
(0.48) for physical disturbance.
Result’s summary
Figure 2: Summary on positive and negative impact of linear infrastructure
Development
The table above shows the results of this case study's local influence on the linear infrastructure project.
Alternative 3 has the most good and negative impact in terms of social, economic, and environmental impact
when compared to alternatives 1 and 2.
Mitigation measures on negative impacts of linear infrastructure development
The linear infrastructure project poses significant social, economic, and environmental dangers to the
surrounding population. Every construction process is divided into three phases: pre-construction, construction,
and operations. Poor planning in the implementation of linear infrastructure projects causes problems among
local residents.
Pre- Construction Phase
Efforts are being made to reduce the negative social, economic, and environmental repercussions of linear
infrastructure development during the preconstruction period.
Table 3.7 Mitigation measures at pre- construction phase
Criteria of potential impacts
Mitigation measures
Potential displacement of residents and business
area
Implement socio-economic survey and prepare proper
resettlement action plan
Potential land acquisition
Avoiding areas that are environmentally sensitive
The proposed alignment through agricultural area
Construction appropriateness
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 129
www.rsisinternational.org
During Construction and Operational Phase
Efforts to reduce the negative social, economic, and environmental repercussions of linear infrastructure
development during the pre-construction period.
Table 3.8 Mitigation measures during construction and operational phase
Criteria of potential impacts
Mitigation measures
Community severance
Road project planning, initial social examination and
environmental
Expose to traffic problem, congestion and
accidents
ensures that adverse environmental and social impacts
are properly controlled
Safety and Health
Minimize air pollution and noise pollution
CONCLUSION
This research study met its overall objectives, which included assessing the significance of potential impacts
arising from this project on affected community input through a census, addressing potential issues from the new
road alignment development, and proposing appropriate mitigation strategies. Furthermore, a few
recommendations have been presented and proposed in order to improve the evaluation of the local effect of
linear infrastructure development, thereby improving project and construction management in the Cameron
Highlands in terms of economy, environment, and social emphasis on infrastructure implementation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). The author would like to express
deepest appreciation to Kementerian Kerja Raya (KKR) for their help and support in this research. The author
grateful to the UiTM for all the facilities provided to complete this research work.
REFERENCES
1. Anna Zamojska & Joanna Próchniak (2019): Measuring the Social Impact of Infrastructure Projects: The
Case of Gdańsk International Fair Co, 1-7.
2. Mariana Mohamed Osman, Syahriah Bachok, Noor Suzilawati Rabe (2015): Local Residents’ Perception
on Socio-Economic impact of Iskandar Malaysia: an example of urban regeneration program in Malaysia,
3.
3. Carlos F. Daganzo (2012): On the Design of Public Infrastructure Systems with Elastic Demand, 2.
4. Muhammad Rafeq Razak, Foziah Johar, Rabiatul Adawiyah Abd Khalil (2016): THE IMPACT OF
ISKANDAR MALAYSIA DEVELOPMENT ON URBAN AMENITIES, 1-3.
5. Anuar Alias, Azlan Shah Ali and Chan Keen Wai (2011): New Urbanism and township developments in
Malaysia, 1 & 10.
6. Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman & Emma Marinie Ahmad Zawawi (2009): Development of facilities
management in Malaysia, 5.
7. B. Srinivasu & P. Srinivasa (2013): Infrastructure Development and Economic growth: Prospects and
Perspective, 1-2.
8. Deepali J. Chaavan & Ravindra H. Sarnaik (2013): Self Sustainable Township, 1.
9. S.H. Wai, Aminah Md Yusof, Syuhaida Ismail and C.A. Ng (2013): Exploring Success Factors of Social
Infrastructure Projects in Malaysia, 1.
10. Avinash Kaur and Rajinder Kaur (2018). Role of Social and Economic Infrastructure in Economic
Department of Punjab. 2454-2415 Vol.6, Issue 5.
