Prediction in a risk analysis context: Implications for selecting a risk perspective in practical applications

Abstract Recently, there have been several calls for increased attention to foundational issues in risk analysis, addressing issues like terminology, principles and theories. An important foundational issue is the appropriateness of different concepts and perspectives for analyzing risk in practical applications. Several authors have addressed this through arguments involving, inter alia, the definition of risk, the ontology of risk, and the reliability and validity of risk analysis. This paper aims to contribute to this discussion by focusing on the concept of prediction. While this term is quite frequently used in risk analysis contexts, no earlier work has specifically focused on the issue of whether risk analyses can be considered to be predictive, and if so, in what sense. Neither has this been linked to the feasibility of risk perspectives. First, two definitions of what prediction can mean are elaborated, and criteria corresponding to these definitions are outlined to facilitate the subsequent discussion. A brief discussion on system types is included, as one type of prediction is defined through the relation between the model and the modeled system. Then, the definitions of prediction and the corresponding criteria are used to consider the appropriateness of two commonly used risk perspectives, namely the probability of frequency and the uncertainty perspective. In the former, a risk analysis aims at estimating an underlying true risk with quantified uncertainty bounds. In the latter, a risk analysis is a descriptive account of judgments and uncertainties by an assessor. It is finally argued that the uncertainty perspective generally is more appropriate than the probability of frequency perspective for practical risk analysis applications.

[1]  T. Aven,et al.  How to define and interpret a probability in a risk and safety setting , 2013 .

[2]  John A. McDermid,et al.  The science and superstition of quantitative risk assessment , 2012 .

[3]  Tony Rosqvist,et al.  On the validation of risk analysis - A commentary , 2010, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[4]  Jason R. W. Merrick,et al.  A Bayesian paired comparison approach for relative accident probability assessment with covariate information , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Emes,et al.  Systems engineering management , 2004 .

[6]  Margaret Virgina Stringfellow Accident analysis and hazard analysis for human and organizational factors , 2010 .

[7]  Terje Aven,et al.  A new perspective on Renn and Klinke's approach to risk evaluation and management , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[8]  Paolo Gardoni,et al.  A Scale of Risk , 2014, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[9]  George E Apostolakis,et al.  How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment? , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[10]  Terje Aven,et al.  Reliability and validity of risk analysis , 2009, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[11]  K. Shrader-Frechette Risk and Rationality: Philosophical Foundations for Populist Reforms , 1991 .

[12]  Galit Shmueli,et al.  To Explain or To Predict? , 2010 .

[13]  Benjamin S. Blanchard,et al.  System Engineering Management: Blanchard/System Engineering Management , 2016 .

[14]  J. Koomey,et al.  Is accurate forecasting of economic systems possible? , 2011 .

[15]  Rob Alexander,et al.  Forecasts or fortune-telling: When are expert judgements of safety risk valid? , 2017 .

[16]  James T. Luxhoj,et al.  Predictive safety analytics: inferring aviation accident shaping factors and causation , 2015 .

[17]  Stan Kaplan,et al.  The Words of Risk Analysis , 1997 .

[18]  Jakub Montewka,et al.  Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

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

[20]  Clifton A. Ericson,et al.  Hazard Analysis Techniques for System Safety , 2005 .

[21]  S. Kaplan,et al.  On The Quantitative Definition of Risk , 1981 .

[22]  Floris Goerlandt,et al.  An approach for reconciling different perspectives and stakeholder views on risk ranking , 2017 .

[23]  Yacov Y Haimes,et al.  On the Complex Definition of Risk: A Systems‐Based Approach , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[24]  Ø. Solberg,et al.  Reflections on the ontological status of risk , 2012 .

[25]  Terje Aven,et al.  Perspectives on risk in a decision-making context – Review and discussion , 2009 .

[26]  S. R. Watson,et al.  The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis , 1994 .

[27]  Norman Fenton,et al.  Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis with Bayesian Networks , 2012 .

[28]  John McDermid,et al.  Fixing the cracks in the crystal ball: A maturity model for quantitative risk assessment , 2014, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[29]  Enrico Zio,et al.  Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[30]  Jakub Montewka,et al.  A framework for risk analysis of maritime transportation systems: A case study for oil spill from tankers in a ship–ship collision , 2015 .

[31]  Floris Goerlandt,et al.  Validity and validation of safety-related quantitative risk analysis , 2016 .

[32]  Roger Flage,et al.  Strengthening quantitative risk assessments by systematic treatment of uncertain assumptions , 2016, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[33]  James S. Hodges,et al.  Is It You or Your Model Talking?: A Framework for Model Validation , 1992 .

[34]  Terje Aven,et al.  On how to define, understand and describe risk , 2010, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[35]  Elisabeth Paté-Cornell,et al.  On “Black Swans” and “Perfect Storms”: Risk Analysis and Management When Statistics Are Not Enough , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[36]  Heather Douglas Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal , 2009 .

[37]  Terje Aven,et al.  Risk communication in the light of different risk perspectives , 2013, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[38]  N Oreskes,et al.  Evaluation (not validation) of quantitative models. , 1998, Environmental health perspectives.

[39]  Chiara Vianello,et al.  Uncertainties in QRA: Analysis of losses of containment from piping and implications on risk prevention and mitigation , 2015 .

[40]  J. Bradbury The Policy Implications of Differing Concepts of Risk , 1989 .

[41]  Tarantola Stefano,et al.  Uncertainty in Industrial Practice - A Guide to Quantitative Uncertainty Management , 2008 .

[42]  Alan Klanac,et al.  Design of marine structures with improved safety for environment , 2011, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[43]  Terje Aven,et al.  Practical implications of the new risk perspectives , 2013, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[44]  James T. Luxhoj,et al.  A conceptual Object-Oriented Bayesian Network (OOBN) for modeling aircraft carrier-based UAS safety risk , 2015 .

[45]  G. Weinberg An Introduction to General Systems Thinking , 1975 .

[46]  Stein Haugen,et al.  Perspectives on risk and the unforeseen , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[47]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  Engineering a Safer World: Systems Thinking Applied to Safety , 2012 .

[48]  Curtis Smith,et al.  Bayesian inference in probabilistic risk assessment - The current state of the art , 2009, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[49]  Terje Aven,et al.  On the ontological status of the concept of risk , 2011 .

[50]  Marvin Rausand,et al.  Ambiguity in risk assessment , 2015 .

[51]  N Oreskes,et al.  Verification, Validation, and Confirmation of Numerical Models in the Earth Sciences , 1994, Science.