IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v236y2022i1p90-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the foundation and use of the de minimis principle in a risk analysis context

Author

Listed:
  • Terje Aven
  • Azadeh Seif

Abstract

‘De minimis risk’ is a basic concept and principle of risk analysis, which states that risks which are sufficiently small can be ignored. This principle is commonly used in practical risk analysis and related decision-making, but its rationale is debated. Recently, authors have argued that de minimis reasoning has no place in rational decision-making. The present paper provides a perspective on the foundation and use of this principle in a risk analysis context. The main aim of the paper is to gain new knowledge about the meaning and scope of the principle in view of contemporary risk science. We evaluate the extent to which different perspectives on risk can explain the disputes concerning the suitability of the principle. Current discussions of the principle have to a large extent been based on probabilistic-based frameworks, whereas the present study also addresses uncertainty-based risk perspectives. Examples are used to illustrate the discussion.

Suggested Citation

  • Terje Aven & Azadeh Seif, 2022. "On the foundation and use of the de minimis principle in a risk analysis context," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 236(1), pages 90-97, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:236:y:2022:i:1:p:90-97
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X211028401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X211028401
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X211028401?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    2. Aven, Terje & Heide, Bjørnar, 2009. "Reliability and validity of risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(11), pages 1862-1868.
    3. Jeryl Mumpower, 1986. "An Analysis of the de minimis Strategy for Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 437-446, December.
    4. Terje Aven, 2018. "Reflections on the Use of Conceptual Research in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2415-2423, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Henrik Hassel & Alexander Cedergren, 2019. "Exploring the Conceptual Foundation of Continuity Management in the Context of Societal Safety," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1503-1519, July.
    3. Aven, Terje & Kristensen, Vidar, 2019. "How the distinction between general knowledge and specific knowledge can improve the foundation and practice of risk assessment and risk-informed decision-making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. Hamed Taherdoost, 2021. "A Review on Risk Management in Information Systems: Risk Policy, Control and Fraud Detection," Post-Print hal-03741848, HAL.
    5. Gilberto Montibeller & L. Alberto Franco & Ashley Carreras, 2020. "A Risk Analysis Framework for Prioritizing and Managing Biosecurity Threats," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2462-2477, November.
    6. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A critical discussion and practical recommendations on some issues relevant to the non-probabilistic treatment of uncertainty in engineering risk assessment," Post-Print hal-01652230, HAL.
    7. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A Critical Discussion and Practical Recommendations on Some Issues Relevant to the Nonprobabilistic Treatment of Uncertainty in Engineering Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(7), pages 1315-1340, July.
    8. Terje Aven, 2018. "Reflections on the Use of Conceptual Research in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2415-2423, November.
    9. Rosqvist, Tony, 2010. "On the validation of risk analysis—A commentary," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1261-1265.
    10. Antão, P. & Sun, S. & Teixeira, A.P. & Guedes Soares, C., 2023. "Quantitative assessment of ship collision risk influencing factors from worldwide accident and fleet data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    11. Terje Aven, 2018. "An Emerging New Risk Analysis Science: Foundations and Implications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 876-888, May.
    12. Julia Eichholz & Nicole Hoffmann & Anja Schwering, 2024. "The role of risk management orientation and the planning function of budgeting in enhancing organizational resilience and its effect on competitive advantages during times of crises," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 17-58, March.
    13. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Mussard, Stéphane & Pi Alperin, María Noel, 2021. "Accounting for risk factors on health outcomes: The case of Luxembourg," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1180-1197.
    15. Zohreh Molamohamadi & Mahmoud Asad Samani & Marjan Karimi, 2024. "Reviewing the historical milestones of risk management," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(12), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    17. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    18. Zeng, Qing & Lu, Xinjie & Xu, Jin & Lin, Yu, 2024. "Macro-Driven Stock Market Volatility Prediction: Insights from a New Hybrid Machine Learning Approach," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB).
    19. Célestin Elock Son, 2018. "Supply Chain Risk Management: A Review of Thirteen Years of Research," Post-Print hal-03029453, HAL.
    20. Heiner Ackermann & Erik Diessel & Michael Helmling & Neil Jami & Johanna Münch, 2024. "Computing Optimal Mitigation Plans for Force-Majeure Scenarios in Dynamic Manufacturing Chains," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1-35, June.
    21. Yijun Liu & Xiaokun Jin & Yunrui Zhang, 2024. "Identifying risks in temporal supernetworks: an IO-SuperPageRank algorithm," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.

    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:sae:risrel:v:236:y:2022:i:1:p:90-97. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.