IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i10p1647-1656.html

Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management

Author

Listed:
  • Terje Aven

Abstract

In spite of the maturity reached by many of the methods used in risk assessment and risk management, broad consensus has not been established on fundamental concepts and principles. The risk fields still suffer from a lack of clarity on many key scientific pillars. The purpose of this article is to point to this situation and through some illustrating examples discuss the challenges that the fields here face. Moreover, the purpose of the article is to reflect on how to improve the present situation and enhance the risk fields. We argue that the establishment of some common scientific pillars as well as a strong and continuous research focus on foundational issues are critical success factors. The article specifically addresses the role of the peer‐reviewed journals and the international standards in the fields. We hope that the article can contribute to a revitalization of the discussion of foundational issues in risk assessment and risk management.

Suggested Citation

  • Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:10:p:1647-1656
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01798.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01798.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01798.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. Aven, Terje & Heide, Bjørnar, 2009. "Reliability and validity of risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(11), pages 1862-1868.
    2. George E. Apostolakis, 2004. "How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 515-520, June.
    3. D. Warner North, 2010. "Probability Theory and Consistent Reasoning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 377-380, March.
    4. Ortwin Renn, 1998. "Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 49-71, January.
    5. Didier Dubois, 2010. "Representation, Propagation, and Decision Issues in Risk Analysis Under Incomplete Probabilistic Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 361-368, March.
    6. Piero Baraldi & Enrico Zio, 2008. "A Combined Monte Carlo and Possibilistic Approach to Uncertainty Propagation in Event Tree Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1309-1326, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Matthew Leitch, 2010. "ISO 31000:2009—The New International Standard on Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 887-892, June.
    9. Terje Aven, 2009. "A new scientific framework for quantitative risk assessments," International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 67-77.
    10. Andrew Stirling, 1998. "Risk at a turning point?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 97-109, April.
    11. Langlois, Richard N & Cosgel, Metin M, 1993. "Frank Knight on Risk, Uncertainty, and the Firm: A New Interpretation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 456-465, July.
    12. Alvin M. Weinberg, 1981. "Reflections on Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 5-7, March.
    13. Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Guiding Resource Allocations Based on Terrorism Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 597-606, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Runde, Jochen, 1998. "Clarifying Frank Knight's Discussion of the Meaning of Risk and Uncertainty," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 22(5), pages 539-546, September.
    16. Robert B. Cumming, 1981. "Is Risk Assessment A Science?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 1-3, March.
    17. Kimberly M. Thompson & Paul F. Deisler & Richard C. Schwing, 2005. "Interdisciplinary Vision: The First 25 Years of the Society for Risk Analysis (SRA), 1980–2005," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1333-1386, December.
    18. Aven, Terje & Vinnem, Jan Erik, 2005. "On the use of risk acceptance criteria in the offshore oil and gas industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 15-24.
    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, 2011. "Selective critique of risk assessments with recommendations for improving methodology and practise," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 509-514.
    2. Roger Flage & Terje Aven & Enrico Zio & Piero Baraldi, 2014. "Concerns, Challenges, and Directions of Development for the Issue of Representing Uncertainty in Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1196-1207, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Terje Aven, 2018. "An Emerging New Risk Analysis Science: Foundations and Implications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 876-888, May.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    8. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    9. Aven, Terje, 2018. "How the integration of System 1-System 2 thinking and recent risk perspectives can improve risk assessment and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 237-244.
    10. Konstantinos Kazaras & Konstantinos Kirytopoulos, 2014. "Challenges for current quantitative risk assessment (QRA) models to describe explicitly the road tunnel safety level," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(8), pages 953-968, September.
    11. Aven, Terje, 2012. "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 33-44.
    12. Terje Aven, 2013. "On the Meaning and Use of the Risk Appetite Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(3), pages 462-468, March.
    13. Terje Aven, 2013. "On Funtowicz and Ravetz's “Decision Stake—System Uncertainties” Structure and Recently Developed Risk Perspectives," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 270-280, February.
    14. Aven, Terje & Ylönen, Marja, 2019. "The strong power of standards in the safety and risk fields: A threat to proper developments of these fields?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 279-286.
    15. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    16. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    17. Goerlandt, Floris & Montewka, Jakub, 2015. "Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 115-134.
    18. Jon T Selvik & Eirik B Abrahamsen, 2017. "On the meaning of accuracy and precision in a risk analysis context," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(2), pages 91-100, April.
    19. 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.
    20. Sarat Sivaprasad & Cameron A. MacKenzie, 2018. "The Hurwicz Decision Rule’s Relationship to Decision Making with the Triangle and Beta Distributions and Exponential Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 139-153, September.

    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:32:y:2012:i:10:p:1647-1656. 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.