Decision Making for Risk Management: A Comparison of Graphical Methods for Presenting Quantitative Uncertainty

Previous research has shown that people err when making decisions aided by probability information. Surprisingly, there has been little exploration into the accuracy of decisions made based on many commonly used probabilistic display methods. Two experiments examined the ability of a comprehensive set of such methods to effectively communicate critical information to a decision maker and influence confidence in decision making. The second experiment investigated the performance of these methods under time pressure, a situational factor known to exacerbate judgmental errors. Ten commonly used graphical display methods were randomly assigned to participants. Across eight scenarios in which a probabilistic outcome was described, participants were asked questions regarding graph interpretation (e.g., mean) and made behavioral choices (i.e., act; do not act) based on the provided information indicated that decision‐maker accuracy differed by graphical method; error bars and boxplots led to greatest mean estimation and behavioral choice accuracy whereas complementary cumulative probability distribution functions were associated with the highest probability estimation accuracy. Under time pressure, participant performance decreased when making behavioral choices.     

Decision Making Under Risk: A Comparison of Bayesian and Fuzzy Set Methods

A classical decision problem is considered where a decision maker is to choose one of a number of actions each offering different consequences. The outcome from a choice of action is uncertain because it depends on the existing state of Nature. Also, the outcome, once an action and state of Nature are specified, may be a vector or a random vector. The decision maker employs both Bayesian methods and fuzzy set techniques to handle the uncertainties. The decision maker is also allowed to use multiple, possibly conflicting, goals in order to determine his best strategy. The Bayesian method produces a set of undominated strategies to choose from, whereas the fuzzy set technique usually produces a unique optimal strategy.     

Ethics, Decision Analysis, and Public Risk

In any analysis of a decision problem involving public risks, ethical implications are introduced. In some cases, these ethical implications may be introduced simply because an analysis is being done. Additional ethical implications may be inherently part of the methodology being utilized or introduced into the specific analysis of the decision problem. In this paper, we investigate where and how ethical implications enter when using the methodology of decision analysis to examine problems involving public risks. We conclude that the methodology of decision analysis is sufficiently robust to allow for numerous different ethical viewpoints to be accounted for in any specific analysis. Stated alternatively, decision analyses of public risks can be conducted in a manner consistent with utilitarianism, deontological theories, libertarianism, egalitarianism, and so forth. However, any specific analysis has embedded within it numerous ethical implications. This suggests that the careful ethical scrutiny of analyses involving the methodology of decision analysis should be placed on the specific application and not on the methodology per se or on the fact that an analysis is undertaken.     

The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective

In commemorating the 40th anniversary of Risk Analysis, this article takes a retrospective look at some of the ways in which decision analysis (as a “sibling field”) has contributed to the development both of the journal, and of risk analysis as a field. I begin with some early foundational papers from the first decade of the journal's history. I then review a number of papers that have applied decision analysis to risk problems over the years, including applications of related methods such as influence diagrams, multicriteria decision analysis, and risk matrices. The article then reviews some recent trends, from roughly the last five years, and concludes with observations about the parallel evolution of risk analysis and decision analysis over the decades—especially with regard to the importance of representing multiple stakeholder perspectives, and the importance of behavioral realism in decision models. Overall, the extensive literature surveyed here supports the view that the incorporation of decision-analytic perspectives has improved the practice of risk analysis.     

Risk Decision Making in Operational Safety Management– Experience from the Nordic Benchmark Study

Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT) and Studsvik AB, Sweden, have simulated decision making of the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate and a power company by applying decision models in a benchmark study. Based on the experience from the benchmark study, a decision analysis framework to be used in safety related problems is outlined. By this framework both the power companies and the safety authorities could be provided with a more rigorous, systematic approach in their decision making. A decision analytic approach provides a structure for identifying the information requirements of the problem solving. Thus it could serve as a discussion forum between the authorities and the utilities. In this context, probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) has a crucial role of expressing the plant safety status in terms of reactor core damage accident probability and of risk contributions from various accident precursors. However, a decision under uncertainty should not be based solely on probabilities, particularly when the event in question is a rare one and its probability of occurrence is estimated by means of different kinds of approximations.     

Risk-Based Decision Making for Terrorism Applications

This article describes the anti-terrorism risk-based decision aid (ARDA), a risk-based decision-making approach for prioritizing anti-terrorism measures. The ARDA model was developed as part of a larger effort to assess investments for protecting U.S. Navy assets at risk and determine whether the most effective anti-terrorism alternatives are being used to reduce the risk to the facilities and war-fighting assets. With ARDA and some support from subject matter experts, we examine thousands of scenarios composed of 15 attack modes against 160 facility types on two installations and hundreds of portfolios of 22 mitigation alternatives. ARDA uses multiattribute utility theory to solve some of the commonly identified challenges in security risk analysis. This article describes the process and documents lessons learned from applying the ARDA model for this application.     

Risk Management and Decision Rules for Light Water Reactors

A quantitative approach to risk management for accidents in light water nuclear power reactors is proposed to serve as one focus for discussion. In this proposal risk management is divided into two major tasks: the predominantly social and political task of setting the safety goals and the technical task of estimating the risks and deciding whether the safety goals have been met. The proposed safety goals include limits on the following: risk to the individual of early death or delayed cancer death; overall societal risk of early or delayed death; and the frequency of core melt accidents as well as the frequency of containment failure, given a core melt. Also included are a small element of risk aversion and an "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) approach with a cost-effectviness criterion which includes both economic and health effects.     

Risk Analysis and Risk Management: An Historical Perspective

This paper reviews the history of risk analysis and risk management, giving special emphasis to the neglected period prior to the 20th century. The overall objective of the paper is to: (1) dampen the prevailing tendency to view present-day concerns about risk in an ahistorical context; (2) shed light on the intellectual antecedents of current thinking about risk; (3) clarify how contemporary ideas about risk analysis and societal risk management differ significantly from the past; and (4) provide a basis for anticipating future directions in risk analysis and management.     

What Can Decision Analysis Do for Invasive Species Management?

Decisions about management of invasive species are difficult for all the reasons typically addressed by multiattribute decision analysis: uncertain outcomes, multiple and conflicting objectives, and many interested parties with differing views on both facts and values. This article illustrates how the tools of multiattribute analysis can improve management of invasive species, with an emphasis on making explicit the social values and preferences that must inform invasive species management. Risk assessment protocols developed previously for invasive species management typically suffer from two interacting flaws: (1) separating risk assessment from risk management, thus disrupting essential connections between the social values at stake in invasive species decisions and the scientific knowledge necessary to predict the likely impacts of management actions, and (2) relying on expert judgment about risk framed in qualitative and value-laden terms, inadvertently mixing the expert's judgment about what is likely to happen with personal preferences. Using the values structuring and probability-modeling elements of formal decision analysis can remedy these difficulties and make invasive species management responsive to both good science and public values. The management of feral pigs in Hawaiian ecosystems illustrates the need for such an integrated approach.     

Decision Making for Group Risk Reduction: Dealing with Epistemic Uncertainty

Group risk is usually represented by FN curves showing the frequency of different accident sizes for a given activity. Many governments regulate group risk through FN criterion lines, which define the tolerable location of an FN curve. However, to compare different risk reduction alternatives, one must be able to rank FN curves. The two main problems in doing this are that the FN curve contains multiple frequencies, and that there are usually large epistemic uncertainties about the curve. Since the mid 1970s, a number of authors have used the concept of “disutility” to summarize FN curves in which a family of disutility functions was defined with a single parameter controlling the degree of “risk aversion.” Here, we show it to be risk neutral, disaster averse, and insensitive to epistemic uncertainty on accident frequencies. A new approach is outlined that has a number of attractive properties. The formulation allows us to distinguish between risk aversion and disaster aversion, two concepts that have been confused in the literature until now. A two‐parameter family of disutilities generalizing the previous approach is defined, where one parameter controls risk aversion and the other disaster aversion. The family is sensitive to epistemic uncertainties. Such disutilities may, for example, be used to compare the impact of system design changes on group risks, or might form the basis for valuing reductions in group risk in a cost‐benefit analysis.     

Landslide Risk Models for Decision Making

This contribution presents a quantitative procedure for landslide risk analysis and zoning considering hazard, exposure (or value of elements at risk), and vulnerability. The method provides the means to obtain landslide risk models (expressing expected damage due to landslides on material elements and economic activities in monetary terms, according to different scenarios and periods) useful to identify areas where mitigation efforts will be most cost effective. It allows identifying priority areas for the implementation of actions to reduce vulnerability (elements) or hazard (processes). The procedure proposed can also be used as a preventive tool, through its application to strategic environmental impact analysis (SEIA) of land-use plans. The underlying hypothesis is that reliable predictions about hazard and risk can be made using models based on a detailed analysis of past landslide occurrences in connection with conditioning factors and data on past damage. The results show that the approach proposed and the hypothesis formulated are essentially correct, providing estimates of the order of magnitude of expected losses for a given time period. Uncertainties, strengths, and shortcomings of the procedure and results obtained are discussed and potential lines of research to improve the models are indicated. Finally, comments and suggestions are provided to generalize this type of analysis.     

Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory

This study integrated risk‐benefit analysis with prospect theory with the overall objective of identifying the type of management behavior represented by farmers’ choices of mastitis control options (MCOs). Two exploratory factor analyses, based on 163 and 175 Swedish farmers, respectively, highlighted attitudes to MCOs related to: (1) grouping cows and applying milking order to prevent spread of existing infection and (2) working in a precautionary way to prevent mastitis occurring. This was interpreted as being based on (1) reactive management behavior on detection of udder‐health problems in individual cows and (2) proactive management behavior to prevent mastitis developing. Farmers’ assessments of these MCOs were found to be based on asymmetrical evaluations of risks and benefits, suggesting that farmers’ management behavior depends on their individual reference point. In particular, attitudes to MCOs related to grouping cows and applying milking order to prevent the spread of mastitis once infected cows were detected were stronger in the risk domain than in the benefit domain, in accordance with loss aversion. In contrast, attitudes to MCOs related to working in a precautionary way to prevent cows from becoming infected in the first place were stronger in the benefit domain than in the risk domain, in accordance with reverse loss aversion. These findings are of practical importance for farmers and agribusiness and in public health protection work to reduce the current extensive use of antibiotics in dairy herds.     

Risk Attitude,Ambiguity Intolerance and Decision Making: An Exploratory Investigation*

Although recent research has identified attitudes towards ambiguity and risk to be important determinants of choice behavior [8] [18], no prior work jointly assessed the roles of both attitudes. We conducted a laboratory experiment using a real decision scenario and conducted exploratory analyses of the relationship between attitudes towards risk and ambiguity and the decision taken by the subjects. The results support the prediction that attitudes towards both risk and ambiguity affect choice behavior. Our exploratory analyses indicate interesting avenues for future research, including an examination of the decision process itself.     

Decision Making During Nuclear Power Plant Incidents—A New Approach to the Evaluation of Precursor Events

Renewed interest in precursor analysis has shown that the evaluation of near misses is an interdisciplinary effort, fundamental within the life of an organization for reducing operational risks and enabling accident prevention. The practice of precursor analysis has been a part of nuclear power plant regulation in the United States for over 25 years. During this time, the models used in the analysis have evolved from simple risk equations to quite complex probabilistic risk assessments. But, one item that has remained constant over this time is that the focus of the analysis has been on modeling the scenario using the risk model (regardless of the model sophistication) and then using the results of the model to determine the severity of the precursor incident. We believe that evaluating precursors in this fashion could be a shortcoming since decision making during the incident is not formally investigated. Consequently, we present the idea for an evaluation procedure that enables one to integrate current practice with the evaluation of decisions made during the precursor event. The methodology borrows from technologies both in the risk analysis and the decision analysis realms. We demonstrate this new methodology via an evaluation of a U.S. precursor incident. Specifically, the course of the incident is represented by the integration of a probabilistic risk assessment model (i.e., the risk analysis tool) with an influence diagram and the corresponding decision tree (i.e., the decision analysis tools). The results and insights from the application of this new methodology are discussed.     

Using Structured Decision Making to Help Implement a Precautionary Approach to Endangered Species Management

Endangered species protection is a significant risk management concern throughout North America. An extensive conceptual literature emphasizes the role to be played by precautionary approaches. Risk managers, typically working in concert with concerned stakeholders, frequently cite the concept as key to their efforts to prevent extinctions. Little has been done, however, to evaluate the multidimensional impacts of precautionary frameworks or to assist in the examination of competing precautionary risk management options as part of an applied risk management decision framework. In this article we describe how decision-aiding techniques can assist in the creation and analysis of alternative precautionary strategies, using the example of a multistakeholder committee charged with protection of endangered Cultus Lake salmon on the Canadian west coast. Although managers were required to adopt a precautionary approach, little attention had been given to how quantitative analyses could be used to help define the concept or to how a precautionary approach might be implemented in the face of difficult economic, social, and biological tradeoffs. We briefly review key steps in a structured decision-making (SDM) process and discuss how this approach was implemented to help bound the management problem, define objectives and performance measures, develop management alternatives, and evaluate their consequences. We highlight the role of strategy tables, employed to help participants identify, alternative management options. We close by noting areas of agreement and disagreement among participants and discuss the implications of decision-focused processes for other precautionary resource management efforts.     

Ecological Risk Ranking: Development and Evaluation of a Method for Improving Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making

This article reports an extension of the Carnegie Mellon risk-ranking method to incorporate ecological risks and their attributes. On the basis of earlier risk-perception studies, we identified a set of 20 relevant attributes for describing health, safety, and environmental hazards in standardized risk summary sheets. In a series of three ranking sessions, 23 laypeople ranked 10 such hazards in a fictional Midwestern U.S. county using both holistic and multiattribute ranking procedures. Results were consistent with those from previous studies involving only health and safety hazards, providing additional evidence for the validity of the method and the replicability of the resulting rankings. Holistic and multiattribute risk rankings were reasonably consistent both for individuals and for groups. Participants reported that they were satisfied with the procedures and results, and indicated their support for using the method to advise real-world risk-management decisions. Agreement among participants increased over the course of the exercise, perhaps because the materials and deliberations helped participants to correct their misconceptions and clarify their values. Overall, health and safety attributes were judged more important than environmental attributes. However, the overlap between the importance rankings of these two sets of attributes suggests that some information about environmental impacts is important to participants' judgments in comparative risk-assessment tasks.     

Dealing with the White Death: Avalanche Risk Management for Traffic Routes

This article discusses mitigation strategies to protect traffic routes from snow avalanches. Up to now, mitigation of snow avalanches on many roads and railways in the Alps has relied on avalanche sheds, which require large initial investments resulting in high opportunity costs. Therefore, avalanche risk managers have increasingly adopted organizational mitigation measures such as warning systems and closure policies instead. The effectiveness of these measures is, however, greatly dependent on human decisions. In this article, we present a method for optimizing avalanche mitigation for traffic routes in terms of both their risk reduction impact and their net benefit to society. First, we introduce a generic framework for assessing avalanche risk and for quantifying the impact of mitigation. This allows for sound cost-benefit comparisons between alternative mitigation strategies. Second, we illustrate the framework with a case study from Switzerland. Our findings suggest that site-specific characteristics of avalanche paths, as well as the economic importance of a traffic route, are decisive for the choice of optimal mitigation strategies. On routes endangered by few avalanche paths with frequent avalanche occurrences, structural measures are most efficient, whereas reliance on organizational mitigation is often the most appropriate strategy on routes endangered by many paths with infrequent or fuzzy avalanche risk. Finally, keeping a traffic route open may be very important for tourism or the transport industry. Hence, local economic value may promote the use of a hybrid strategy that combines organizational and structural measures to optimize the resource allocation of avalanche risk mitigation.     

Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management

This is a perspective article on foundational issues in risk assessment and management. The aim is to discuss the needs, obstacles, and challenges for the establishment of a renewed, strong scientific foundation for risk assessment and risk management suited for the current and future technological challenges. The focus is on (i) reviewing and discussing the present situation and (ii) identifying how to best proceed in the future, to develop the risk discipline in the directions needed. The article provides some reflections on the interpretation and understanding of the concept of “foundations of risk assessment and risk management” and the challenges therein. One main recommendation is that different arenas and moments for discussion are needed to specifically address foundational issues in a way that embraces the many disciplinary communities involved (from social scientists to engineers, from behavioral scientists to statisticians, from health physicists to lawyers, etc.). One such opportunity is sought in the constitution of a novel specialty group of the Society of Risk Analysis.     

Intergenerational Risk Decision Making: A Practical Example

There is no such thing as intergenerational decision making, at least not yet. In fact, there is no such thing as intragenerational decision making in the context of maximizing overall social good given resource limitations, there are just decisions being made in an ad hoc fashion. Even if one assumes that there is such a thing as intragenerational decision making, no uniform standard or guidance exists to make societal decisions for the common good. Risks to society are judged unevenly within the same agency and across agencies. Decisions are made in isolation and not weighed in the societal context of what is intra or intergenerationally important. The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) has set forth a framework for intergenerational decision making that provides a consistent and fair basis for making tough decisions in order to address difficult issues such as the long-term disposal of nuclear wastes. NAPA recognizes that there is an intergenerational obligation that must encompass broader questions than the narrow issue of waste disposal since resources are finite and needs are great. The fundamental principles are based on sustainability with the overarching objective that "no generation should needlessly, now or in the future, deprive its successors of the opportunity to enjoy a quality of life equivalent to its own." Coupled with this objective are four supporting principles of trusteeship, sustainability, chain of obligation, and precaution. The NAPA process also recognizes that no decision can be final and that a "rolling future" view is better than making decisions for "all time." It attempts to balance the needs of the present with those of the future in an open and transparent process that is aimed at producing a decision, not just endless analysis. The U.S. Congress and president should develop a rational standard by which to judge laws that involve intra and intergenerational issues relative to the overall societal good. Present regulations need to be evaluated relative to a uniform level of risk and benefit to assess where the limited money available can do the most good for both the present and future generations in the context of NAPA sustainability principles. It is hoped that decision makers will take a serious look at this process since it can work to resolve stakeholder stalemate.