Qualification of Formal Safety Assessment: an exploratory study

Abstract Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) is an approach adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to support a systemic and structured assessment of proposals for new international regulations to improve shipping safety. Several case studies based on the approach have been conducted during recent years. This paper addresses the issue of confidence in a FSA, as encountered during three case studies conducted by the authors over the years 1998–2002. A peer review process—FSA qualification—is introduced to support the consolidation of confidence in FSA results. Some qualification criteria are suggested.

[1]  T. Modis,et al.  Experts in uncertainty , 1993 .

[2]  James H. Lambert,et al.  When and How Can You Specify a Probability Distribution When You Don't Know Much? II , 1999 .

[3]  I. Cartuja.  ON SCIENCE AND PRECAUTION IN THE MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL RISK , 2000 .

[4]  Enrico Zio,et al.  Two methods for the structured assessment of model uncertainty by experts in performance assessments of radioactive waste repositories , 1996 .

[5]  Dale Hattis,et al.  A. Uncertainty and Variability , 1999 .

[6]  Jan Holmberg,et al.  Experience from the comparison of two PSA-studies , 2001 .

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[8]  Sanna Sonninen,et al.  The implementation of the VTMIS system for the Gulf of Finland – a FSA study , 2022 .

[9]  L. Pinola,et al.  Preliminary Requirements for a Knowledge Engineering Approach to Expert Judgment Elicitation in Probabilistic Safety Assessment , 1996 .

[10]  George Apostolakis,et al.  A taxonomy of issues related to the use of expert judgments in probabilistic safety studies , 1992 .

[11]  L. Preston,et al.  The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications , 1995 .

[12]  T. Bedford,et al.  Supporting ALARP decision making by cost benefit analysis and multiattribute utility theory , 2005 .

[13]  Risto Tuominen,et al.  FSA Study on transportation of iron ore concentrate by pusher-barges on the Luleå-Raahe route , 2001 .

[14]  A. Stirling.  On science and precaution in the management of technological risk: volume I - a synthesis report of case studies , 1999 .

[15]  Vicki M. Bier,et al.  B. Extremes, Extrapolation, And Surprise , 1999 .

[16]  Vinh N. Dang,et al.  Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management , 2004 .

[17]  G. Apostolakis,et al.  Models for the use of Expert Opinions , 1984 .

[18]  Terje Aven,et al.  Models and model uncertainty in the context of risk analysis , 2003, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[19]  V. M. Bier,et al.  On the state of the art: risk communication to decision-makers , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[20]  Robert E. Melchers,et al.  On the ALARP approach to risk management , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[22]  Gary F. Bennett,et al.  Quality management of safety and risk analysis , 1995 .

[23]  R. A. Waller,et al.  Low-Probability High-Consequence Risk Analysis , 1984, Advances in Risk Analysis.

[24]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Eliciting probabilities from experts in complex technical problems , 1991 .

[25]  Jiangping Wang.  The current status and future aspects in formal ship safety assessment , 2001 .

[26]  L. Phillips,et al.  Faciliated Work Groups: Theory and Practice , 1993 .

[27]  Urho Pulkkinen,et al.  Methods for combination of expert judgements , 1993 .