On the Complex Quantification of Risk: Systems‐Based Perspective on Terrorism

This article highlights the complexity of the quantification of the multidimensional risk function, develops five systems‐based premises on quantifying the risk of terrorism to a threatened system, and advocates the quantification of vulnerability and resilience through the states of the system. The five premises are: (i) There exists interdependence between a specific threat to a system by terrorist networks and the states of the targeted system, as represented through the system's vulnerability, resilience, and criticality‐impact. (ii) A specific threat, its probability, its timing, the states of the targeted system, and the probability of consequences can be interdependent. (iii) The two questions in the risk assessment process: “What is the likelihood?” and “What are the consequences?” can be interdependent. (iv) Risk management policy options can reduce both the likelihood of a threat to a targeted system and the associated likelihood of consequences by changing the states (including both vulnerability and resilience) of the system. (v) The quantification of risk to a vulnerable system from a specific threat must be built on a systemic and repeatable modeling process, by recognizing that the states of the system constitute an essential step to construct quantitative metrics of the consequences based on intelligence gathering, expert evidence, and other qualitative information. The fact that the states of all systems are functions of time (among other variables) makes the time frame pivotal in each component of the process of risk assessment, management, and communication. Thus, risk to a system, caused by an initiating event (e.g., a threat) is a multidimensional function of the specific threat, its probability and time frame, the states of the system (representing vulnerability and resilience), and the probabilistic multidimensional consequences.     

Some Considerations on the Definition of Risk Based on Concepts of Systems Theory and Probability

The concept of risk has been applied in many modern science and technology fields. Despite its successes in many applicative fields, there is still not a well‐established vision and universally accepted definition of the principles and fundamental concepts of the risk assessment discipline. As emphasized recently, the risk fields suffer from a lack of clarity on their scientific bases that can define, in a unique theoretical framework, the general concepts in the different areas of application. The aim of this article is to make suggestions for another perspective of risk definition that could be applied and, in a certain sense, generalize some of the previously known definitions (at least in the fields of technical and scientific applications). By drawing on my experience of risk assessment in different applicative situations (particularly in the risk estimation for major industrial accidents, and in the health and ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites), I would like to revise some general and foundational concepts of risk analysis in as consistent a manner as possible from the axiomatic/deductive point of view. My proposal is based on the fundamental concepts of the systems theory and of the probability. In this way, I try to frame, in a single, broad, and general theoretical context some fundamental concepts and principles applicable in many different fields of risk assessment. I hope that this article will contribute to the revitalization and stimulation of useful discussions and new insights into the key issues and theoretical foundations of risk assessment disciplines.     

On Some Recent Definitions and Analysis Frameworks for Risk,Vulnerability, and Resilience

Recently, considerable attention has been paid to a systems‐based approach to risk, vulnerability, and resilience analysis. It is argued that risk, vulnerability, and resilience are inherently and fundamentally functions of the states of the system and its environment. Vulnerability is defined as the manifestation of the inherent states of the system that can be subjected to a natural hazard or be exploited to adversely affect that system, whereas resilience is defined as the ability of the system to withstand a major disruption within acceptable degradation parameters and to recover within an acceptable time, and composite costs, and risks. Risk, on the other hand, is probability based, defined by the probability and severity of adverse effects (i.e., the consequences). In this article, we look more closely into this approach. It is observed that the key concepts are inconsistent in the sense that the uncertainty (probability) dimension is included for the risk definition but not for vulnerability and resilience. In the article, we question the rationale for this inconsistency. The suggested approach is compared with an alternative framework that provides a logically defined structure for risk, vulnerability, and resilience, where all three concepts are incorporating the uncertainty (probability) dimension.     

Risk Policies in the United States: Definition and Characteristics Based on a Scoping Review of the Literature

The concept of “risk policy” is used with increasing frequency by decisionmakers, researchers, and the media. However, there is no precise, generally accepted definition of what is covered by policies in this area. Based on a scoping review of the literature published in key journals in the sector, we have identified the main characteristics of public risk policies drawn up and implemented in the United States. The sample comprised 21 articles published in six multidisciplinary journals between 2000 and 2010.     

A Factor Analysis Approach Toward Reconciling Community Vulnerability and Resilience Indices for Natural Hazards

The concepts of vulnerability and resilience help explain why natural hazards of similar type and magnitude can have disparate impacts on varying communities. Numerous frameworks have been developed to measure these concepts, but a clear and consistent method of comparing them is lacking. Here, we develop a data-driven approach for reconciling a popular class of frameworks known as vulnerability and resilience indices. In particular, we conduct an exploratory factor analysis on a comprehensive set of variables from established indices measuring community vulnerability and resilience at the U.S. county level. The resulting factor model suggests that 50 of the 130 analyzed variables effectively load onto five dimensions: wealth, poverty, agencies per capita, elderly populations, and non–English-speaking populations. Additionally, the factor structure establishes an objective and intuitive schema for relating the constituent elements of vulnerability and resilience indices, in turn affording researchers a flexible yet robust baseline for validating and expanding upon current approaches.     

A Resilience-Based Approach to Risk Assessments—Building Resilient Organizations under Arctic Conditions

Reliability and higher levels of safety are thought to be achieved by using systematic approaches to managing risks. The assessment of risks has produced a range of different approaches to assessing these uncertainties, presenting models for how risks affect individuals or organizations. Contemporary risk assessment tools based on this approach have proven difficult for practitioners to use as tools for tactical and operational decision making. This article presents an alternative to these assessments by utilizing a resilience perspective, arguing that complex systems are inclined to variety and uncertainty regarding the results they produce and are therefore prone to systemic failures. A continuous improvement approach is a source of reliability when managing complex systems and is necessary to manage varieties and uncertainties. For an organization to understand how risk events occur, it is necessary to define what is believed to be the equilibrium of the system in time and space. By applying a resilience engineering (RE) perspective to risk assessment, it is possible to manage this complexity by assessing the ability to respond, monitor, learn, and anticipate risks, and in so doing to move away from the flawed frequency and consequences approach. Using a research station network in the Arctic as an example illustrates how an RE approach qualifies assessments by bridging risk assessments with value-creation processes. The article concludes by arguing that a resilience-based risk assessment can improve on current practice, including for organizations located outside the Arctic region.     

Risk Modeling of Interdependent Complex Systems of Systems: Theory and Practice

The emergence of the complexity characterizing our systems of systems (SoS) requires a reevaluation of the way we model, assess, manage, communicate, and analyze the risk thereto. Current models for risk analysis of emergent complex SoS are insufficient because too often they rely on the same risk functions and models used for single systems. These models commonly fail to incorporate the complexity derived from the networks of interdependencies and interconnectedness (I–I) characterizing SoS. There is a need to reevaluate currently practiced risk analysis to respond to this reality by examining, and thus comprehending, what makes emergent SoS complex. The key to evaluating the risk to SoS lies in understanding the genesis of characterizing I–I of systems manifested through shared states and other essential entities within and among the systems that constitute SoS. The term “essential entities” includes shared decisions, resources, functions, policies, decisionmakers, stakeholders, organizational setups, and others. This undertaking can be accomplished by building on state‐space theory, which is fundamental to systems engineering and process control. This article presents a theoretical and analytical framework for modeling the risk to SoS with two case studies performed with the MITRE Corporation and demonstrates the pivotal contributions made by shared states and other essential entities to modeling and analysis of the risk to complex SoS. A third case study highlights the multifarious representations of SoS, which require harmonizing the risk analysis process currently applied to single systems when applied to complex SoS.     

On The Quantitative Definition of Risk

A quantitative definition of risk is suggested in terms of the idea of a "set of triplets". The definition is extended to include uncertainty and completeness, and the use of Bayes' theorem is described in this connection. The definition is used to discuss the notions of "relative risk", "relativity of risk", and "acceptability of risk".     

Dependency of Crop Production between Global Breadbaskets: A Copula Approach for the Assessment of Global and Regional Risk Pools

As recent events have shown, simultaneous crop losses in different parts of the world can cause serious risks to global food security. However, to date, little is known about the spatial dependency of lower than expected crop yields from global breadbaskets. This especially applies in the case of extreme events, i.e., where one or more breadbaskets are experiencing far below average yields. Without such information, risk management approaches cannot be applied and vulnerability to extremes may remain high or even increase in the future around the world. We tackle both issues from an empirical perspective focusing on wheat yield. Interdependencies between historically observed wheat yield deviations in five breadbaskets (United States, Argentina, India, China, and Australia) are estimated via copula approaches that can incorporate increasing tail dependencies. In doing so, we are able to attach probabilities to interregional as well as global yield losses. To address the robustness of our results, we apply three different methods for constructing multivariate copulas: vine copulas, ordered coupling using a minimax approach, and hierarchical structuring. We found interdependencies between states within breadbaskets that led us to the conclusion that risk pooling for extremes is less favorable on the regional level. However, notwithstanding evidence of global climatic teleconnections that may influence crop production, we also demonstrate empirically that wheat production losses are independent between global breadbaskets, which strengthens the case for interregional risk pooling strategies. We argue that through interregional risk pooling, postdisaster liabilities of governments and international donors could be decreased.     

Economics of Disaster Risk,Social Vulnerability,and Mental Health Resilience

We investigate the relationship between exposure to Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita and mental health resilience by vulnerability status, with particular focus on the mental health outcomes of single mothers versus the general public. We advance a measurable notion of mental health resilience to disaster events. We also calculate the economic costs of poor mental health days added by natural disaster exposure. Negative binomial analyses show that hurricane exposure increases the expected count of poor mental health days for all persons by 18.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.44–31.14%), and by 71.88% (95% CI, 39.48–211.82%) for single females with children. Monthly time‐series show that single mothers have lower event resilience, experiencing higher added mental stress. Results also show that the count of poor mental health days is sensitive to hurricane intensity, increasing by a factor of 1.06 (95% CI, 1.02–1.10) for every billion (U.S.$) dollars of damage added for all exposed persons, and by a factor of 1.08 (95% CI, 1.03–1.14) for single mothers. We estimate that single mothers, as a group, suffered over $130 million in productivity loss from added postdisaster stress and disability. Results illustrate the measurability of mental health resilience as a two‐dimensional concept of resistance capacity and recovery time. Overall, we show that natural disasters regressively tax disadvantaged population strata.     

基于混合整数规划法的企业信用风险评估研究

运用混合整数规划法构建企业信用风险评估模型,并将其应用于我国商业银行信用风险评估中。该模型具有非参数检验特性,不需要样本数据服从正态分布和等协方差,并通过两阶段的分类过程对企业信用状况进行判别。研究结果表明,混合整数规划法有较强的预测贷款企业信用风险的能力。     

On the Ethical Justification for the Use of Risk Acceptance Criteria

To protect people from hazards, the common safety regulation regime in many industries is based on the use of minimum standards formulated as risk acceptance or tolerability limits. The limits are seen as absolute, and in principle these should be met regardless of costs. The justification is ethical - people should not be exposed to a risk level exceeding certain limits. In this article, we discuss this approach to safety regulation and its justification. We argue that the use of such limits is based on some critical assumptions; that low accident risk has a value in itself, that risk can be accurately measured and the authorities specify the limits. However, these assumptions are not in general valid, and hence the justification of the approach can be questioned. In the article, we look closer into these issues, and we conclude that there is a need for rethinking this regulation approach - its ethical justification is not stronger than for alternative approaches. Essential for the analysis is the distinction between ethics of the mind and ethics of the consequences, which has several implications that are discussed.     

A Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk

Accounting for about 290,000–650,000 deaths across the globe, seasonal influenza is estimated by the World Health Organization to be a major cause of mortality. Hence, there is a need for a reliable and robust epidemiological surveillance decision-making system to understand and combat this epidemic disease. In a previous study, the authors proposed a decision support system to fight against seasonal influenza. This system is composed of three subsystems: (i) modeling and simulation, (ii) data warehousing, and (iii) analysis. The analysis subsystem relies on spatial online analytical processing (S-OLAP) technology. Although the S-OLAP technology is useful in analyzing multidimensional spatial data sets, it cannot take into account the inherent multicriteria nature of seasonal influenza risk assessment by itself. Therefore, the objective of this article is to extend the existing decision support system by adding advanced multicriteria analysis capabilities for enhanced seasonal influenza risk assessment and monitoring. Bearing in mind the characteristics of the decision problem considered in this article, a well-known multicriteria classification method, the dominance-based rough set approach (DRSA), was selected to boost the existing decision support system. Combining the S-OLAP technology and the multicriteria classification method DRSA in the same decision support system will largely improve and extend the scope of analysis capabilities. The extended decision support system has been validated by its application to assess seasonal influenza risk in the northwest region of Algeria.     

Reducing Bushfire Risk by Planning and Design: A Professional Focus

While links between planning and resilience are increasingly touted as fundamental to managing urban settlements, there are limited practical examples. This paper provides an example via regulatory processes, in parallel with the exercise of professional discretion. Using analysis of diverse urban planning proposals in bushfire prone areas of Victoria Australia, a systematic and site-specific approach for bushfire risk assessment is set out. A three-step process is proposed as a basis for delivery of design solutions to manage bushfire risks. The paper concludes by arguing that professional judgement is a fundamental part of bushfire risk reduction within a regulatory framework.     

Cross-Cultural Differences in Risk Perception: A Model-Based Approach

The present study assessed cross-cultural differences in the perception of financial risks. Students at large universities in Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the U.S., as well as a group of Taiwanese security analysts rated the riskiness of a set of monetary lotteries. Risk judgments differed with nationality, but not with occupation (students vs. security analysts) and were modeled by the Conjoint Expected Risk (CER) model.⁽¹⁾ Consistent with cultural differences in country uncertainty avoidance,⁽²⁾ CER model parameters of respondents from the two Western countries differed from those of respondents from the two countries with Chinese cultural roots: The risk judgments of respondents from Hong Kong and Taiwan were more sensitive to the magnitude of potential losses and less mitigated by the probability of positive outcomes.     

Psychometric and Demographic Predictors of the Perceived Risk of Terrorist Threats and the Willingness to Pay for Terrorism Risk Management Programs

A 2009 national telephone survey of 924 U.S. adults assessed perceptions of terrorism and homeland security issues. Respondents rated severity of effects, level of understanding, number affected, and likelihood of four terrorist threats: poisoned water supply; explosion of a small nuclear device in a major U.S. city; an airplane attack similar to 9/11; and explosion of a bomb in a building, train, subway, or highway. Respondents rated perceived risk and willingness to pay (WTP) for dealing with each threat. Demographic, attitudinal, and party affiliation data were collected. Respondents rated bomb as highest in perceived risk but gave the highest WTP ratings to nuclear device. For both perceived risk and WTP, psychometric variables were far stronger predictors than were demographic ones. OLS regression analyses using both types of variables to predict perceived risk found only two significant demographic predictors for any threat—Democrat (a negative predictor for bomb) and white male (a significant positive predictor for airline attack). In contrast, among psychometric variables, severity, number affected, and likelihood were predictors of all four threats and level of understanding was a predictor for one. For WTP, education was a negative predictor for three threats; no other demographic variables were significant predictors for any threat. Among psychometric variables, perceived risk and number affected were positive predictors of WTP for all four threats; severity and likelihood were predictors for three; level of understanding was a significant predictor for two.     

基于左截尾数据的损失分布法度量操作风险:以中国商业银行为例

本文提出了采用左截尾数据的损失分布法来计算银行的操作风险资本金。基于不完全的操作风险损失数据,首先给出了频度分布和程度分布的参数估计方法;其次采用中国商业银行的操作风险损失数据进行实证分析;最后采用压力测试验证了模型的有效性。实证结果表明基于左截尾数据的损失分布方法不仅符合数据特点,而且能够很好的拟合操作风险的损失数据,同时模型具有很好的鲁棒性和敏感性。     

How to Design Rating Schemes of Risk Matrices: A Sequential Updating Approach

Risk matrices have been widely used as a risk evaluation tool in many fields due to their simplicity and intuitive nature. Designing a rating scheme, i.e., determining the number of ratings used in a risk matrix and assigning different ratings to different cells, is an essential part of risk matrix construction. However, most of the related literature has focused on applying a risk matrix to various fields, instead of researching how to design risk matrices. Based on the analysis of several current rules, we propose a new approach, namely, the sequential updating approach (SUA), to design the rating scheme of a risk matrix in a reliable way. In this article, we propose three principles and a rating algorithm based on these principles. The three principles, namely, adjusted weak consistency, consistent internality, and continuous screening, characterize a good rating scheme. The resulting rating scheme has been proven to be unique. A global rating algorithm is then proposed to create the design that satisfies the three principles. We then explore the performance of the SUA. An illustrative application is first given to explain the feasibility of our approach. The sensitivity analysis shows that our method captures a resolution‐reliability tradeoff for decisionmakers in choosing an appropriate rating scheme for a risk matrix. Finally, we compare the designs based on the SUA and Cox's axioms, highlighting the advantages of the SUA.     

Asteroid Risk Assessment: A Probabilistic Approach

Following the 2013 Chelyabinsk event, the risks posed by asteroids attracted renewed interest, from both the scientific and policy‐making communities. It reminded the world that impacts from near‐Earth objects (NEOs), while rare, have the potential to cause great damage to cities and populations. Point estimates of the risk (such as mean numbers of casualties) have been proposed, but because of the low‐probability, high‐consequence nature of asteroid impacts, these averages provide limited actionable information. While more work is needed to further refine its input distributions (e.g., NEO diameters), the probabilistic model presented in this article allows a more complete evaluation of the risk of NEO impacts because the results are distributions that cover the range of potential casualties. This model is based on a modularized simulation that uses probabilistic inputs to estimate probabilistic risk metrics, including those of rare asteroid impacts. Illustrative results of this analysis are presented for a period of 100 years. As part of this demonstration, we assess the effectiveness of civil defense measures in mitigating the risk of human casualties. We find that they are likely to be beneficial but not a panacea. We also compute the probability—but not the consequences—of an impact with global effects (“cataclysm”). We conclude that there is a continued need for NEO observation, and for analyses of the feasibility and risk‐reduction effectiveness of space missions designed to deflect or destroy asteroids that threaten the Earth.