IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v18y1998i6p773-780.html

Principles for Conduct of Pest Risk Analyses: Report of an Expert Work hop

Author

Listed:
  • George M. Gray
  • Jon C. Allen
  • David E. Burmaster
  • Stuart H. Gage
  • James K. Hammitt
  • Stanley Kaplan
  • Ralph L. Keeney
  • Joseph G. Morse
  • D. Warner North
  • Jan P. Nyrop
  • Alina Stahevitch
  • Richard Williamslau

Abstract

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) have focused attention on risk assessment of potential insect, weed, and animal pests and diseases of livestock. These risks have traditionally been addressed through quarantine protocols ranging from limits on the geographical areas from which a product may originate, postharvest disinfestation procedures like fumigation, and inspections at points of export and import, to outright bans. To ensure that plant and animal protection measures are not used as nontariff trade barriers, GATT and NAFTA require pest risk analysis (PRA) to support quarantine decisions. The increased emphasis on PRA has spurred multiple efforts at the national and international level to design frameworks for the conduct of these analyses. As approaches to pest risk analysis proliferate, and the importance of the analyses grows, concerns have arisen about the scientific and technical conduct of pest risk analysis. In January of 1997, the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA) held an invitation‐only workshop in Washington, D.C. to bring experts in risk analysis and pest characterization together to develop general principles for pest risk analysis. Workshop participants examined current frameworks for PRA, discussed strengths and weaknesses of the approaches, and formulated principles, based on years of experience with risk analysis in other setting and knowledge of the issues specific to analysis of pests. The principles developed highlight the both the similarities of pest risk analysis to other forms of risk analysis, and its unique attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • George M. Gray & Jon C. Allen & David E. Burmaster & Stuart H. Gage & James K. Hammitt & Stanley Kaplan & Ralph L. Keeney & Joseph G. Morse & D. Warner North & Jan P. Nyrop & Alina Stahevitch & Richar, 1998. "Principles for Conduct of Pest Risk Analyses: Report of an Expert Work hop," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 773-780, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:18:y:1998:i:6:p:773-780
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01119.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01119.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01119.x?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. M. Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell & Robert G. Bea, 1992. "Management Errors and System Reliability: A Probabilistic Approach and Application to Offshore Platforms," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Harry Otway & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1992. "Expert Judgment in Risk Analysis and Management: Process, Context, and Pitfalls," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 83-93, March.
    3. Stephen L. Derby & Ralph L. Keeney, 1981. "Risk Analysis: Understanding “How Safe is Safe Enough?“," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(3), pages 217-224, September.
    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. repec:plo:pone00:0102592 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Daniel W. McKenney & Marla C. Downing & Frank Sapio, 2009. "Mapping Invasive Species Risks with Stochastic Models: A Cross‐Border United States‐Canada Application for Sirex noctilio Fabricius," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 868-884, June.

    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. Ine H. J. Van Der Fels‐Klerx & Louis H. J. Goossens & Helmut W. Saatkamp & Suzan H. S. Horst, 2002. "Elicitation of Quantitative Data from a Heterogeneous Expert Panel: Formal Process and Application in Animal Health," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 67-81, February.
    2. M. Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell & Linda M. Lakats & Dean M. Murphy & David M. Gaba, 1997. "Anesthesia Patient Risk: A Quantitative Approach to Organizational Factors and Risk Management Options," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 511-523, August.
    3. Dimitrina S. Dimitrova & Vladimir K. Kaishev & Shouqi Zhao, 2015. "Modeling Finite‐Time Failure Probabilities in Risk Analysis Applications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1919-1939, October.
    4. Pearson, R.J. & Costley, A.E. & Phaal, R. & Nuttall, W.J., 2021. "Corrigendum to “Technology Roadmapping for mission-led agile hardware development: a case study of a commercial fusion energy start-up” Technological Forecasting & Social Change 158 (2020) 120064," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    5. Sjöberg, Lennart, 2003. "Risk communication between experts and the public: perceptions and intentions," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2003:13, Stockholm School of Economics.
    6. Luca Podofillini & Vinh Dang & Enrico Zio & Piero Baraldi & Massimo Librizzi, 2010. "Using Expert Models in Human Reliability Analysis—A Dependence Assessment Method Based on Fuzzy Logic," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(8), pages 1277-1297, August.
    7. John S. Evans & John D. Graham & George M. Gray & Robert L. Sielken, 1994. "A Distributional Approach to Characterizing Low‐Dose Cancer Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 25-34, February.
    8. Prager, Fynnwin & Rhoads, Mohja & Martínez, Jose N., 2022. "The COVID-19 economic shutdown and the future of flexible workplace practices in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 241-255.
    9. Mostafa Aliyari & Yonas Z Ayele & Abbas Barabadi & Enrique Lopez Droguett, 2019. "Risk analysis in low-voltage distribution systems," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(2), pages 118-138, April.
    10. Selvik, Jon T. & Bellamy, Linda J., 2020. "Addressing human error when collecting failure cause information in the oil and gas industry: A review of ISO 14224:2016," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    11. Damian Morgan & Joan Ozanne-Smith, 2019. "A configural model of expert judgement as a preliminary epidemiological study of injury problems: An application to drowning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, October.
    12. Julia Reis & Julie Shortridge, 2020. "Impact of Uncertainty Parameter Distribution on Robust Decision Making Outcomes for Climate Change Adaptation under Deep Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 494-511, March.
    13. Gregory F. Nemet & Laura Diaz Anadon & Elena Verdolini, 2017. "Quantifying the Effects of Expert Selection and Elicitation Design on Experts’ Confidence in Their Judgments About Future Energy Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 315-330, February.
    14. Robert J. Budnitz & George Apostolakis & David M. Boore & Lloyd S. Cluff & Kevin J. Coppersmith & C. Allin Cornell & Peter A. Morris, 1998. "Use of Technical Expert Panels: Applications to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 463-469, August.
    15. Khorsandi, Jahon & Aven, Terje, 2017. "Incorporating assumption deviation risk in quantitative risk assessments: A semi-quantitative approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 22-32.
    16. Mario Paulo Brito & Gwyn Griffiths & Peter Challenor, 2010. "Risk Analysis for Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Operations in Extreme Environments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1771-1788, December.
    17. Roland W. Scholz & Ralf Hansmann, 2007. "Combining Experts' Risk Judgments on Technology Performance of Phytoremediation: Self‐Confidence Ratings, Averaging Procedures, and Formative Consensus Building," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 225-240, February.
    18. Mario P. Brito & Ian G. J. Dawson, 2020. "Predicting the Validity of Expert Judgments in Assessing the Impact of Risk Mitigation Through Failure Prevention and Correction," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1928-1943, October.
    19. Radboud J. Duintjer Tebbens & Mark A. Pallansch & Konstantin M. Chumakov & Neal A. Halsey & Tapani Hovi & Philip D. Minor & John F. Modlin & Peter A. Patriarca & Roland W. Sutter & Peter F. Wright & S, 2013. "Review and Assessment of Poliovirus Immunity and Transmission: Synthesis of Knowledge Gaps and Identification of Research Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(4), pages 606-646, April.
    20. Justin M. Ross & Sarah E. Larson & Chad Wall, 2012. "Are Surveys Of Experts Unbiased? Evidence From College Football Rankings," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 502-522, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:18:y:1998:i:6:p:773-780. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.