• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >How Solid Is the Dutch (and the British) National Risk Assessment? Overview and Decision-Theoretic Evaluation
【24h】

How Solid Is the Dutch (and the British) National Risk Assessment? Overview and Decision-Theoretic Evaluation

机译：荷兰（和英国）国家风险评估的可靠性如何？概述和决策理论评估

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

Internationally, national risk assessment (NRA) is rapidly gaining government sympathy as a science-based approach toward prioritizing the management of national hazards and threats, with the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in leading positions since 2007. NRAs are proliferating in Europe; they are also conducted in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, while regional RAs now exist for over 100 Dutch or British provinces or counties. Focused on the Dutch NRA (DNRA) and supported by specific examples, summaries and evaluations are given of its (1) scenario development, (2) impact assessment, (3) likelihood estimation, (4) risk diagram, and (5) capability analysis. Despite the DNRA's thorough elaboration, apparent weaknesses are lack of stakeholder involvement, possibility of false-positive risk scenarios, rigid multicriteria impact evaluation, hybrid methods for likelihood estimation, half-hearted use of a "probability x effect" definition of risk, forced comparison of divergent risk scenarios, and unclear decision rules for risk acceptance and safety enhancement. Such weaknesses are not unique for the DNRA. In line with a somewhat reserved encouragement by the OECD (Studies in Risk Management. Innovation in Country Risk Management. Paris: OECD, 2009), the scientific solidity of NRA results so far is questioned, and several improvements are suggested. One critical point is that expert-driven NRAs may preempt political judgments and decisions by national security authorities. External review and validation of major NRA components is recommended for strengthening overall results as a reliable basis for national and/or regional safety policies. Meanwhile, a broader, more transactional concept of risk may lead to better national and regional risk assessments.
机译：在国际上，国家风险评估（NRA）作为一种以科学为基础的方法来优先确定国家危害和威胁的管理方法，正在迅速赢得政府的同情，荷兰和英国自2007年以来一直处于领先地位。它们还在澳大利亚，加拿大，新西兰和美国进行，而区域性RA现已存在于100多个荷兰或英国的省或县。重点关注荷兰NRA（DNRA）并得到具体示例的支持，并对其（1）方案开发，（2）影响评估，（3）可能性估计，（4）风险图和（5）能力进行总结和评估。分析。尽管DNRA进行了详尽的阐述，但明显的弱点是缺乏利益相关者的参与，假阳性风险场景的可能性，严格的多准则影响评估，混合的可能性估计方法，对风险的“概率x效应”定义的半心半意的使用，强制比较不同的风险方案，以及不清楚的风险接受和安全增强决策规则。这样的弱点对于DNRA并非唯一。与经济合作与发展组织（OECD）在某种程度上保留的鼓励（风险管理研究。国家风险管理的创新。巴黎：经济合作与发展组织，2009）相一致，人们对迄今为止NRA结果的科学可靠性提出了质疑，并提出了一些改进建议。一个关键点是，由专家驱动的NRA可能会取代国家安全机构的政治判断和决定。建议对NRA的主要组成部分进行外部审查和确认，以加强总体结果，作为国家和/或区域安全政策的可靠基础。同时，更广泛，更具交易性的风险概念可能会导致更好的国家和地区风险评估。

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