IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v22y2002i3p633-646.html

Risk and Uncertainty Analysis in Government Safety Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell

Abstract

Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) can be an effective tool to assess risks and uncertainties and to set priorities among safety policy options. Based on systems analysis and Bayesian probability, PRA has been applied to a wide range of cases, three of which are briefly presented here: the maintenance of the tiles of the space shuttle, the management of patient risk in anesthesia, and the choice of seismic provisions of building codes for the San Francisco Bay Area. In the quantification of a risk, a number of problems arise in the public sector where multiple stakeholders are involved. In this article, I describe different approaches to the treatments of uncertainties in risk analysis, their implications for risk ranking, and the role of risk analysis results in the context of a safety decision process. I also discuss the implications of adopting conservative hypotheses before proceeding to what is, in essence, a conditional uncertainty analysis, and I explore some implications of different levels of ``conservatism'' for the ranking of risk mitigation measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell, 2002. "Risk and Uncertainty Analysis in Government Safety Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 633-646, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:3:p:633-646
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.00043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.00043?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. B. John Garrick, 1984. "Recent Case Studies and Advancements in Probabilistic Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 267-279, December.
    2. 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.
    3. J. C. Helton & D. R. Anderson & H.‐N. Jow & M. G. Marietta & G. Basabilvazo, 1999. "Performance Assessment in Support of the 1996 Compliance Certification Application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 959-986, October.
    4. Peter A. Morris, 1974. "Decision Analysis Expert Use," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(9), pages 1233-1241, May.
    5. M.-Elisabeth Paté-Cornell & Paul S. Fischbeck, 1994. "Risk Management for the Tiles of the Space Shuttle," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 64-86, February.
    6. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    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. Hou, Tianfeng & Nuyens, Dirk & Roels, Staf & Janssen, Hans, 2019. "Quasi-Monte Carlo based uncertainty analysis: Sampling efficiency and error estimation in engineering applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Amirhossein Mokhtari & H. Christopher Frey, 2005. "Sensitivity Analysis of a Two‐Dimensional Probabilistic Risk Assessment Model Using Analysis of Variance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1511-1529, December.
    3. Dirk Haubrich, 2006. "Modern Politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Domestic Public Policy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(2), pages 399-423, June.
    4. Christoph M. Rheinberger, 2010. "Experimental Evidence Against the Paradigm of Mortality Risk Aversion," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 590-604, April.
    5. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    6. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.
    7. Michael Greenberg & Charles Haas & Anthony Cox & Karen Lowrie & Katherine McComas & Warner North, 2012. "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 771-781, May.
    8. Tim Bedford, 2013. "Decision Making for Group Risk Reduction: Dealing with Epistemic Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1884-1898, October.
    9. Morales-Torres, Adrián & Escuder-Bueno, Ignacio & Serrano-Lombillo, Armando & Castillo Rodríguez, Jesica T., 2019. "Dealing with epistemic uncertainty in risk-informed decision making for dam safety management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. H. Christopher Frey, 2002. "Introduction to Special Section on Sensitivity Analysis and Summary of NCSU/USDA Workshop on Sensitivity Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 539-545, June.
    11. Steve Jacob & Nathalie Schiffino, 2015. "Risk Policies in the United States: Definition and Characteristics Based on a Scoping Review of the Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 849-858, May.
    12. Terje Aven & Louis Anthony Cox, 2016. "National and Global Risk Studies: How Can the Field of Risk Analysis Contribute?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 186-190, February.
    13. Joshua T. Cohen & George M. Gray, 2010. "Letter to the Editor," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(10), pages 1457-1458, October.
    14. Anna Kosovac & Brian Davidson & Hector Malano, 2019. "Are We Objective? A Study into the Effectiveness of Risk Measurement in the Water Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, February.
    15. Olga Špačková & Daniel Straub, 2015. "Cost‐Benefit Analysis for Optimization of Risk Protection Under Budget Constraints," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 941-959, May.
    16. Øystein Amundrud & Terje Aven & Roger Flage, 2017. "How the definition of security risk can be made compatible with safety definitions," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(3), pages 286-294, June.
    17. Roxane Foulser‐Piggott & Gary Bowman & Martin Hughes, 2020. "A Framework for Understanding Uncertainty in Seismic Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(1), pages 169-182, January.
    18. Christoph M. Rheinberger & Michael Bründl & Jakob Rhyner, 2009. "Dealing with the White Death: Avalanche Risk Management for Traffic Routes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 76-94, January.

    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, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell, 2002. "Finding and Fixing Systems Weaknesses: Probabilistic Methods and Applications of Engineering Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 319-334, April.
    3. M. Elisabeth Paté‐Cornell, 1999. "Conditional Uncertainty Analysis and Implications for Decision Making: The Case of WIPP," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 995-1002, October.
    4. Tianyang Wang & James S. Dyer & John C. Butler, 2016. "Modeling Correlated Discrete Uncertainties in Event Trees with Copulas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 396-410, February.
    5. Anne Lavigne, 2006. "Gouvernance et investissement des fonds de pension privés aux Etats-Unis," Working Papers halshs-00081401, HAL.
    6. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    7. Morone, Andrea & Caferra, Rocco, 2024. "The Ambiguity Box: A new tool to generate ambiguity in the lab," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    8. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    9. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    10. Simona Fabrizi & Steffen Lippert & Addison Pan & Matthew Ryan, 2022. "A theory of unanimous jury voting with an ambiguous likelihood," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 399-425, October.
    11. Kiyohiko G. Nishimura & Hiroyuki Ozaki, 2001. "Search under the Knightian Uncertainty," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-112, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    12. Liu, Hui-hui & Song, Yao-yao & Liu, Xiao-xiao & Yang, Guo-liang, 2020. "Aggregating the DEA prospect cross-efficiency with an application to state key laboratories in China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    13. James K. Hammitt, 2020. "Valuing mortality risk in the time of COVID-19," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 129-154, October.
    14. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    15. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2020. "Recursive objective and subjective multiple priors," Post-Print halshs-02900497, HAL.
    16. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Vassili Vergopoulos, 2014. "A Behavioral Definition of States of the World," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14047, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    18. López-Guzmán, Silvia & Sautua, Santiago I., 2024. "Effects of a fearful emotional state on financial decisions in the presence of prior outcome information," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    20. Wang, Ning & Zhang, Yumo, 2024. "Robust asset-liability management games for n players under multivariate stochastic covariance models," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 67-98.

    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:22:y:2002:i:3:p:633-646. 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.