A conceptual framework for risk assessment and risk management

• Autorzy: Aven T.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper presents and discusses a conceptual framework for risk assessment and risk management where risk is based on the triplet events, consequences and uncertainties. In addition to risk, the framework highlights the concepts of vulnerability and resilience. An example of the analysis of an LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) plant is included to demonstrate the applicability of the framework. The proposed framework is more general than existing frameworks, for example the traditional Kaplan & Garrick approach, and provides also New perspectives on how to understand and describe uncertainties in a risk assessment and risk management context.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

risk; probability; risk assessments; uncertainties

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Bezpieczeństwa i Niezawodności
• Czasopismo: Journal of Polish Safety and Reliability Association
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: Vol. 1, No. 1
• Strony: 15--26
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 33 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Aven T.

• University of Stavanger, Norway

Bibliografia

• [1] Apostolakis, G. (1990). The concept of probability in safety assessments of technological systems. Science, 250, 1359-1364.
• [2] Apostolakis, G. E. (2004). How useful is quantitative risk assessment? Risk Analysis, 24, 515-520.
• [3] Aven, T. (2003). Foundations of Risk Analysis. Wiley, Chichester.
• [4] Aven, T. (2007). A unified framework for risk and vulnerability analysis and management covering both safety and security. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 92, 745-754.
• [5] Aven, T. (2008). Risk Analysis. Assessing Uncertainties beyond Probabilities. Wiley, Chichester.
• [6] Aven, T. (2009). A new scientific framework for quantitative risk assessments. International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, 1 (1), 67-77.
• [7] Aven, T. (2010). Some reflections on uncertainty analysis and management. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95 (2010), 195-201.
• [8] Aven, T. (2010). On how to define, understand and describe risk. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95, 623-631
• [9] Aven, T. & Renn, O. (2009). On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain. Journal of Risk Research, 12, 1-11.
• [10] Aven, T. & Vinnem, J. E. (2007). Risk Management, with Applications from the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry. Springer-Verlag, New York.
• [11] Bedford, T. & Cooke, R. (2001). Probabilistic Risk Analysis. Foundations and Methods. Cambridge University Publishing Ltd, Cambridge.
• [12] Bernardo, J. M. & Smith, A. F. (1994). Bayesian Theory. Wiley, New York.
• [13] de Finetti, B. (1974). Theory of Probability. Wiley, New York.
• [14] Devooght, J. (1998). Model uncertainty and model inaccuracy. Reliab Engng Syst Safety, 59, 171-185.
• [15] Flage, R. & Aven, T. (2009). Expressing andcommunicating uncertainty in relation toquantitative risk analysis (QRA). Reliability & Risk Analysis: Theory & Applications, 2(13), 9-18.
• [16] Gillies, D. (2000). Philosophical Theories of Probability. Routledge, London.
• [17] Helton J. C. (1994). Treatment of uncertainty in performance assessments for complex systems. Risk Analysis, 14, 483-511.
• [18] Hollnagel, E. (2007). http://sites.google.com/site/erikhollnagel2/whatisresilienceengineering%3F, Accessed 23 February 2010.
• [19] Kaminski, J. Jr., Riera, J. D., de Menezes, R. C. R., & Miguel, L. F. F. (2008). Model uncertainty In the assessment of transmission line towers subjected to cable rupture. Engineering Structures, 30, 2935-2944.
• [20] Kaplan, S. & Garrick, B. J. (1981). On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis, 1, 11-27.
• [21] Lindley, D. V. (2000). The philosophy of statistics. The Statistician, 49, 293-337.
• [22] Lindley, D. V. (2006). Understanding Uncertainty. Wiley, Hoboken, N.J.
• [23] Mosleh, A. & Bier, V. M. (1996). Uncertainty about probability: a reconciliation with the subjectivist viewpoint. IEEE Trans. on Systems. Man and Cyber. Part A: Systems and Humans. 26, 303-310.
• [24] Nilsen, T. & Aven, T. (2003). Models and model uncertainty in the context of risk analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 79, 309-317.
• [25] Östergaard, C., Dogliani, M., Guedes Soares, C., Parmentier, G. & Pedersen, P. T. (1996). Measures of model uncertainty in the assessment of primary stresses in ship structures. Marine Structures, 9, 427-447.
• [26] Paté-Cornell, M. E. (1996). Uncertainties in risk analysis: Six levels of treatment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 54 (2-3), 95-111.
• [27] Polasek, W. (2000). The Bernoullis and the Origin of Probability Theory: Looking back after 300 years. Resonance, 5, 26-42.
• [28] Singpurwalla, N. (2006). Reliability and Risk. A Bayesian Perspective. Wiley, N.J.
• [29] Steen, R. & Aven, T. (2010). A risk perspective suitable for resilience engineering. Paper submitted for possible publication.
• [30] Vatn, J. (2010) Issues related to localization of an LNG plant. In Bris, R., Guedes Soares, C. and Martorell, S. editors. Reliability, Risk and Safety. vol. 2, 917-921, Taylor & Francis Group, London.
• [31] Vinnem, J. E. (2010). Risk analysis and risk acceptance criteria in the planning processes of hazardous facilities – a case of an LNG plant In an urban area. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95, 662-670.
• [32] Winkler, R. L. (1996). Uncertainty in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 85, 127-132.
• [33] Zio, E. & Apostolakis, G. E. (1996). Two methods for the structured assessment of model uncertainty by experts in performance assessments of radioactive waste repositories. Reliab Engng Syst Safety, 54, 225-241.