IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i13p5461-d381435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design for Societal Resilience: The Risk Evaluation Diversity-Aiding Approach (RED-A)

Author

Listed:
  • Abby Muricho Onencan

    (Policy Analysis Section, Multi-Actor Systems (MAS) Department, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Building 31, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX Delft P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands
    Sustainable Design Engineering (SDE) Department, Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Landbergstraat 15, 2628 CE Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Lian Ena Liu

    (Policy Analysis Section, Multi-Actor Systems (MAS) Department, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Building 31, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX Delft P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Bartel Van de Walle

    (Policy Analysis Section, Multi-Actor Systems (MAS) Department, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Building 31, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX Delft P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The global impacts of disaster risks are on the rise. Moreover, evidence shows that the severity of damage will increase exponentially. In 2019, there were 395 natural disasters that caused 11,755 deaths. Literature and practice indicate that diversification of disaster risk management (DRM) approaches can make communities more resilient. One notable bottleneck in adopting diverse DRM approaches is the historical dominance of natural and technological sciences with little contribution from social sciences. Thus, a heterogeneous social-technical approach to DRM is rare and risk governance challenges are hardly understood. We conducted a systematic literature and practice review and extracted data to develop and answer five sub-questions. After that, we reviewed relevant information and selected eight risk evaluation approaches. We made comparisons and used the input to design the Risk Evaluation Diversity-aiding Approach (RED-A). The approach consists of 12 criteria and a checklist with 22 items. RED-A provides guidance to DRM researchers and practitioners when conducting socio-technical risk evaluations. It helps identify cognitive biases in the ongoing DRM process that may largely impact the quality of risk evaluation procedures. The goal of the 22-item checklist is to ensure that the 12 RED-A criteria are incorporated as much as possible to support the progressive transition towards a heterogeneous social-technical DRM approach. Finally, the RED-A criteria and checklist are applied in the Solotvyno municipality context (in Ukraine), to illustrate the use of the approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Abby Muricho Onencan & Lian Ena Liu & Bartel Van de Walle, 2020. "Design for Societal Resilience: The Risk Evaluation Diversity-Aiding Approach (RED-A)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-28, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5461-:d:381435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5461/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5461/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abby Muricho Onencan & Bert Enserink & Bartel Van de Walle, 2018. "A Study of Trust and Cooperation in the Nzoia River Basin Using a Water Policy Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Victoria Sword-Daniels & Christine Eriksen & Emma E. Hudson-Doyle & Ryan Alaniz & Carolina Adler & Todd Schenk & Suzanne Vallance, 2018. "Embodied uncertainty: living with complexity and natural hazards," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 290-307, March.
    3. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2019. "Decisions under uncertainty in social contexts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 73-95.
    4. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2009. "The Role of Quantitative Risk Assessments for Characterizing Risk and Uncertainty and Delineating Appropriate Risk Management Options, with Special Emphasis on Terrorism Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 587-600, April.
    5. Kristensen, V. & Aven, T. & Ford, D., 2006. "A new perspective on Renn and Klinke's approach to risk evaluation and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(4), pages 421-432.
    6. Abby Muricho Onencan & Bert Enserink & Bartel Van de Walle, 2019. "Sustainability Indicators: Monitoring Cross-County Water Cooperation in the Nzoia River Basin, Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-30, January.
    7. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2009. "On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, January.
    8. Andreas Klinke & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 273-292, March.
    9. Brecht, Henrike & Deichmann, Uwe & Wang, Hyoung Gun, 2013. "A global urban risk index," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6506, The World Bank.
    10. Abby Muricho Onencan & Bartel Van de Walle, 2018. "From Paris Agreement to Action: Enhancing Climate Change Familiarity and Situation Awareness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-30, June.
    11. Amos Tversky & Itamar Simonson, 1993. "Context-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1179-1189, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Fekete & Jakob Rhyner, 2020. "Sustainable Digital Transformation of Disaster Risk—Integrating New Types of Digital Social Vulnerability and Interdependencies with Critical Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    2. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin de Jong & Andreas Klinke, 2021. "Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-532, March.
    3. Abby Muricho Onencan & Bert Enserink & Bartel Van de Walle, 2019. "Sustainability Indicators: Monitoring Cross-County Water Cooperation in the Nzoia River Basin, Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-30, January.
    4. Terje Aven, 2011. "On Some Recent Definitions and Analysis Frameworks for Risk, Vulnerability, and Resilience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 515-522, April.
    5. Jamie K. Wardman & Gabe Mythen, 2016. "Risk communication: against the Gods or against all odds? Problems and prospects of accounting for Black Swans," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(10), pages 1220-1230, November.
    6. Moore, Don A., 1999. "Order Effects in Preference Judgments: Evidence for Context Dependence in the Generation of Preferences, ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 146-165, May.
    7. Flores, Alvaro & Berbeglia, Gerardo & Van Hentenryck, Pascal, 2019. "Assortment optimization under the Sequential Multinomial Logit Model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1052-1064.
    8. Christoph Engel, 2006. "The Difficult Reception of Rigorous Descriptive Social Science in the Law," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2006_1, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    9. Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2023. "Relative risk taking and social curiosity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 243-264.
    10. Kazagli, Evanthia & de Lapparent, Matthieu, 2023. "A discrete choice modeling framework of heterogenous decision rules accounting for non-trading behavior," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    11. J. Park & T. P. Seager & P. S. C. Rao & M. Convertino & I. Linkov, 2013. "Integrating Risk and Resilience Approaches to Catastrophe Management in Engineering Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(3), pages 356-367, March.
    12. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    13. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    14. Mandler, Michael, 2015. "Rational agents are the quickest," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 206-233.
    15. Dengsheng Wu & Xiaoqian Zhu & Jie Wan & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li, 2019. "A Multiobjective Optimization Approach for Selecting Risk Response Strategies of Software Project: From the Perspective of Risk Correlations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 339-364, January.
    16. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    17. Aven, Terje, 2010. "Some reflections on uncertainty analysis and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 195-201.
    18. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    19. Neelke Doorn, 2015. "The Blind Spot in Risk Ethics: Managing Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 354-360, March.
    20. Banerjee, Priyodorshi & Das, Tanmoy, 2019. "Simultaneous decisions under risk: An experimental investigation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 82(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5461-:d:381435. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.