Advancing Methods for National and Global Risk Studies
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 36, Heft 5, S. 867-868
ISSN: 1539-6924
37 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 36, Heft 5, S. 867-868
ISSN: 1539-6924
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 27, Heft 3, S. 597-606
ISSN: 1539-6924
Establishing tolerable levels of risk is one of the most contentious and important risk management decisions. With every regulatory or funding decision for a risk management program, society decides whether or not risk is tolerable. The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) is a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grant program designed to enhance security and overall preparedness to prevent, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism by providing financial assistance for planning, equipment, training, and exercise needs of large urban areas. After briefly reviewing definitions of terrorism risk and rationales for risk‐based resource allocation, this article compares estimates of terrorism risk in urban areas that received UASI funding in 2004 to other federal risk management decisions. This comparison suggests that UASI allocations are generally consistent with other federal risk management decisions. However, terrorism risk in several cities that received funding is below levels that are often tolerated in other risk management contexts. There are several reasons why the conclusions about terrorism risk being de minimis in specific cities should be challenged. Some of these surround the means used to estimate terrorism risk for this study. Others involve the comparison that is made to other risk management decisions. However, many of the observations reported are valid even if reported terrorism risk estimates are several orders of magnitude too low. Discussion of resource allocation should be extended to address risk tolerance and include explicit comparisons, like those presented here, to other risk management decisions.
Department of Defense (DoD) installations rely on the commercial electricity grid for 99 percent of their electricity needs, but the U.S. electricity grid is vulnerable to disruption from natural hazards and actor-induced outages, such as physical or cyber attacks. Using portfolio analysis methods for assessing capability options, this paper presents a framework to evaluate choices among energy security strategies for DoD installations.
In: Journal of risk research: the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan, Band 22, Heft 12, S. 1546-1560
ISSN: 1466-4461
In: Journal of homeland security and emergency management, Band 13, Heft 1, S. 3-33
ISSN: 1547-7355
Abstract
Reliably managing homeland security risks requires an understanding of which risks are more concerning than others. This paper applies a validated risk ranking methodology, the Deliberative Method for Ranking Risks, to the homeland security domain. This method provides a structured approach to elicit risk rankings from participants based on deliberative consideration of science-based risk assessments. Steps in this effort include first identifying the set of attributes that must be covered when describing terrorism and disaster hazards in a comprehensive manner, then developing concise summaries of existing knowledge of a broad set of homeland security hazards. Using these materials, the study elicits relative concerns about the hazards that are being considered. The relative concerns about hazards provide a starting point for prioritizing solutions for reducing risks to homeland security. The consistency and agreement of the rankings, as well as the individual satisfaction with the process and results, suggest that the Deliberative Method for Ranking Risks can be appropriately applied in the homeland security domain. The rankings themselves reflected greater concern over natural disasters than terrorist events. This research suggests that deliberative risk ranking methods could provide a valid and reliable description of individuals' concerns about homeland security risks to inform strategic planning.
In: Decision analysis: a journal of the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences, INFORMS, Band 11, Heft 1, S. 63-81
ISSN: 1545-8504
Biosurveillance provides information that improves decisions about mitigating the effects of disease outbreaks and bioterrorism. The success of biosurveillance depends on the effectiveness of at least four key processes: data collection, data analysis and interpretation, data integration from across organizations, and action (including public responses) based upon results of the analysis. Questions typically arise about whether information from biosurveillance systems represents a threat that justifies a response. To begin answering these questions, the Institute of Medicine Standing Committee on Health Threats Resilience has been undertaking discussions of strategies that the Department of Homeland Security National Biosurveillance Integration Center could use to strengthen its decision support and decision analysis functions. As part of these discussions, this paper applies two standard decision analysis tools to biosurveillance–decision trees and value-of-information analysis—to assess the implications of strategies to enhance biosurveillance and to improve decisions about whether and how to act after detection of a biosurveillance signal. This application demonstrates how decision analysis tools can be used to improve public health preparedness decision making by developing a road map for how best to enhance biosurveillance through better analytic tools and methods.
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 28, Heft 2, S. 325-339
ISSN: 1539-6924
This article presents a framework for using probabilistic terrorism risk modeling in regulatory analysis. We demonstrate the framework with an example application involving a regulation under consideration, the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative for the Land Environment, (WHTI‐L). First, we estimate annualized loss from terrorist attacks with the Risk Management Solutions (RMS) Probabilistic Terrorism Model. We then estimate the critical risk reduction, which is the risk‐reducing effectiveness of WHTI‐L needed for its benefit, in terms of reduced terrorism loss in the United States, to exceed its cost. Our analysis indicates that the critical risk reduction depends strongly not only on uncertainties in the terrorism risk level, but also on uncertainty in the cost of regulation and how casualties are monetized. For a terrorism risk level based on the RMS standard risk estimate, the baseline regulatory cost estimate for WHTI‐L, and a range of casualty cost estimates based on the willingness‐to‐pay approach, our estimate for the expected annualized loss from terrorism ranges from $2.7 billion to $5.2 billion. For this range in annualized loss, the critical risk reduction for WHTI‐L ranges from 7% to 13%. Basing results on a lower risk level that results in halving the annualized terrorism loss would double the critical risk reduction (14–26%), and basing the results on a higher risk level that results in a doubling of the annualized terrorism loss would cut the critical risk reduction in half (3.5–6.6%). Ideally, decisions about terrorism security regulations and policies would be informed by true benefit‐cost analyses in which the estimated benefits are compared to costs. Such analyses for terrorism security efforts face substantial impediments stemming from the great uncertainty in the terrorist threat and the very low recurrence interval for large attacks. Several approaches can be used to estimate how a terrorism security program or regulation reduces the distribution of risks it is intended to manage. But, continued research to develop additional tools and data is necessary to support application of these approaches. These include refinement of models and simulations, engagement of subject matter experts, implementation of program evaluation, and estimating the costs of casualties from terrorism events.
In: EGYR-D-24-02487
SSRN
Much worldwide cargo, from raw materials to finished products, travels viacontainerized shipping. For the shippers, the main concern has always beenlosses from theft or accident. But shipping containers are as attractive toterrorists as they are to thieves and smugglers
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 27, Heft 5, S. 1365-1380
ISSN: 1539-6924
Variability in ecological risk perceptions was investigated by surveying members of four stakeholder groups commonly involved in environmental policy debates. Fifty‐six individuals from government, industry, environmental, and general‐public groups completed a risk‐perception survey in which they evaluated 34 environmental hazards on 17 attributes and also evaluated the riskiness and acceptability of each hazard. In addition, participants reported their environmental beliefs and norms using Dunlap et al.'s revised New Ecological Paradigm Scale and modified versions of Schwartz's Awareness of Consequences and Personal Norms Scales. Group membership was predictive of participants' scores on the belief and norm scales. Factor analysis of attribute ratings (averaged across participants) revealed the anticipated three oblique factors: ecological impacts, scientific understanding, and aesthetic impacts. Factor patterns were very similar for the four stakeholder groups. Factors from the aggregate analysis were predictive of individuals' riskiness judgments, but these relationships were moderated by participants' group membership, beliefs, and norms. Compared to members of other groups, members of the general public placed less emphasis on ecological impacts and more emphasis on the other two factors when judging the ecological riskiness of hazards. To our knowledge, these results represent the first formal tests of interactions between hazard characteristics and participant characteristics in determining riskiness judgments, and illustrate how traditional psychometric analyses can be successfully coupled with individual‐difference measures to improve the understanding of risk perception.
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 22, Heft 5, S. 1019-1033
ISSN: 1539-6924
Beryllium is the strongest of the lightweight metals. Used primarily in military applications prior to the end of the Cold War, beryllium is finding new applications in many commercial products, including computers, telecommunication equipment, and consumer and automotive electronics. The use of beryllium in nondefense consumer applications is of concern because beryllium is toxic. Inhalation of beryllium dust or vapor causes a chronic lung disease in some individuals at concentrations as low as 0.01 μg/m3 in air. As beryllium enters wider commerce, it is prudent to ask what risks this might present to the general public and to workers downstream of the beryllium materials industry. We address this question by evaluating the potential for beryllium exposure from the manufacturing, use, recycle, and disposal of beryllium‐containing products. Combining a market study with a qualitative exposure analysis, we determine which beryllium applications and life cycle phases have the largest exposure potential. Our analysis suggests that use and maintenance of the most common types of beryllium‐containing products do not result in any obvious exposures of concern, and that maintenance activities result in greater exposures than product use. Product disposal has potential to present significant individual risks, but uncertainties concerning current and future routes of product disposal make it difficult to be definitive. Overall, additional exposure and dose‐response data are needed to evaluate both the health significance of many exposure scenarios, and the adequacy of existing regulations to protect workers and the public. Although public exposures to beryllium and public awareness and concern regarding beryllium risks are currently low, beryllium risks have psychometric qualities that may lead to rapidly heightened public concern.
In: RAND Corporation conference proceedings series
Congress enacted the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) in 2002, in response to terrorism insurance becoming unavailable or, when offered, extremely costly in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The law provides a government reinsurance backstop in the case of a terrorist attack by providing mechanisms for avoiding an immediate drawdown of capital for insured losses or possibly covering the most extreme losses. Extended first in 2005 and again in 2007, TRIA is set to expire at the end of 2014, and Congress is again reconsidering the appropriate government role in terrorism insurance markets. This policy brief examines the potential national security implications of allowing TRIA to expire. Examining the history of terrorism in the United States since the passage of TRIA and reviewing counterterrorism studies, the authors find that terrorism remains a real national security threat, but one that is very difficult for insurers to model the risk of. They also find that terrorism risk insurance can contribute to making communities more resilient to terrorism events, so, to the extent that terrorism insurance is more available with TRIA than without it, renewing the legislation would contribute to improved national security
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is responsible for controlling the flow of goods and people across the U.S. border, but compelling methods for producing estimates of the total flow of illicit goods or border crossings do not yet exist. This paper describes four innovative approaches to estimating the total flow of illicit border crossings between ports of entry. Each approach is sufficiently promising to warrant further attention
In: Technical report TR-586-AF/NETL
The government, as a principal, may seek to induce a private investor, as anagent, to build and operate an unconventional-oil production plant topromote early production experience with such plants. Given this goal,facing significant uncertainty about the future, the government wants tolimit the cost to the public treasury of doing this. This report offers ananalytic way to design and assess packages of policy instruments that thegovernment can use to achieve its goal. It starts with general principles ofthe economic theories of contracting and agency. Looking across manyalternative futures he