• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Reliability Engineering & System Safety >Who cares what it means? Practical reasons for using the word resilience with critical infrastructure operators
【24h】

Who cares what it means? Practical reasons for using the word resilience with critical infrastructure operators

机译：谁关心它的意思？利用关键基础设施运营商使用单词弹性的实际原因

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Resilience: a highly debated term, with what seems to be an endless amount of slightly varied definitions depending on the sector, domain, or researcher who is addressing the topic, mainly boils down to rebounding after a crisis. For critical infrastructure (CI), the EU-funded H2020 IMPROVER project used the following definition: "the ability of a CI system exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, for the preservation and restoration of essential societal services." This was the starting point for much of the work done within that project, however, through six interactive workshops with infrastructure operators organized by the IMPROVER project, what has become apparent is that the definition of resilience isn't what matters; what does matter is the way resilience changes the outlook of operators. This paper presents the results of a critical thematic analysis carried out on the discussions held at these workshops. The findings reflect the practitioners' views on resilience and are in strong agreement with much of the current academic literature, in particular with literature on resilience engineering. One of the main findings is that resilience as a concept is operationalisable and that a lack of a consensus on details of a definition is no obstacle to using the term or striving to operationalise it. Indeed, resilience is an optimistic approach when compared to current risk management practices, allowing operators to be actors in responding to crisis as opposed to simply being subjects exposed to risks. While many aspects of resilience are also found in risk management, the ability to learn how to respond to unexpected events appears to empower operators. Furthermore, the change in perspective from risk to resilience better deals with another change critical infrastructure operators are going through: from protecting assets from hazards to being able to continuously provide a minimum level of essential services to the public.
机译：恢复力：一个高次讨论的术语，根据正在解决这个话题的部门，域名或研究人员，似乎是一个无穷无尽的定义，主要归结为危机后的反弹。对于关键基础设施（CI），欧盟资助的H2020改进项目使用以下定义：“CI系统暴露于抗蚀性，吸收，容纳和恢复及时有效的危险的影响的能力，保存和恢复基本社会服务。“这是该项目内部的大部分工作的起点，然而，通过六个互动研讨会与由改进项目组织的基础设施运营商，变得明显的是，复原性的定义并不重要;重要的是恢复力改变运营商的前景。本文介绍了在这些研讨会上举行的讨论中进行的关键主题分析的结果。调查结果反映了从业者对恢复力的看法，并与当前的学术文献中的大部分意见，特别是对恢复力工程的文献。其中一个主要结果是，作为一个概念的恢复能力是可操作的，并且对定义细节缺乏共识，没有使用术语或努力运作它的障碍。实际上，与当前风险管理实践相比，恢复力是一种乐观的方法，使运营商成为应对危机的行为者，而不是仅仅是暴露于风险的主题。虽然在风险管理中也发现了许多恢复力的各个方面，但了解如何响应意外事件的能力出现为授权运营商。此外，从恢复性风险的角度变化更好地处理另一个改变关键基础设施运营商正在通过：从保护资产免受危害，以便能够为公众提供最低水平的基本服务。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号