World Congress on Risk 2015
19-23 July, 2015, Singapore

Online Program



Session Schedule & Abstracts


* Disclaimer: All presentations represent the views of the authors, and not the organizations that support their research. Please apply the standard disclaimer that any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations in abstracts, posters, and presentations at the meeting are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other organization or agency. Meeting attendees and authors should be aware that this disclaimer is intended to apply to all abstracts contained in this document. Authors who wish to emphasize this disclaimer should do so in their presentation or poster. In an effort to make the abstracts as concise as possible and easy for meeting participants to read, the abstracts have been formatted such that they exclude references to papers, affiliations, and/or funding sources. Authors who wish to provide attendees with this information should do so in their presentation or poster.

Common abbreviations

Monday 20-07-2015

M4-C
National and Global Risk Governance

Room: Creation   14:00–15:30

Chair(s): Myriam Merad



1    National risk assessment: practice and implications for sustainable development. Stepanyan M, Risk Society; Mennen M, National Institute of Public Health and Environment, Centre for Environmental Safety, The Netherlands   info@risk-society.com (92)

Abstract: Risk management is becoming more and more articulated within the political and strategic agendas of the nation states. This is explained largely by the growing interdependencies across sectors, industries, countries, and regions resulting in increased uncertainties and growing number of emerging risks. Can risk management help countries addressing the fundamental questions for sustainable development and protecting the undisturbed functioning of country and society: What needs to be avoided and/or reduced? What needs to be sustained? What needs to be developed? The article argues that there are two distinct approaches towards risk management emerging at the global level. One approach, largely adopted by the EU and OECD member states, is explained in terms of societal resilience, preventing negative shocks (natural hazards, technical failure, and malicious threats) and preserving country’s safety and security. Another approach is proposed by the WB for countries’ development and addresses both opportunities and obstacles that a low/middle-income country might encounter on the pathway towards development. The purpose of the paper is to review both approaches to reveal the implications for sustainable development and the potential for mutual learning. The paper analyzes the cases of national risk assessment in the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, and Morocco and shows similarities, differences, opportunities, benefits and pitfalls illustrated by practical examples. Magda Stepanyan, MA, MSc, CIRM She is the Founder & CEO of the Risk Society consultancy (www.risk-society.com). Marcel Mennen, PhD National Institute of Public Health and Environment, Centre for Environmental Safety

2    Challenges of Anticipation and Management of Risks in Global Governance. Klinke A., Associate Professor   aklinke@grenfell.mun.ca (153)

Abstract: World politics is challenged to cope with global risks emerging in domains such as environment, economy, security and health. Since their scopes and effects transcend socio-political and natural boundaries, they call for sustainable global risk governance. The paper represents a project work in progress (collaboration between Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada, and University of Giessen, Germany) that scrutinizes convergences or divergences between the anticipatory estimation of risks and the strategies and measures of risk management in international regulations. How capable are international institutions to anticipate and prevent future risks? What counts as a risk and is selected to be worth considering? How do societies and international politics frame such problems? Which actors, processes and institutions at the international level construct and frame phenomena as risk, make educated guesses about hazardousness and uncertainty, and draw conclusion on deductive policies and risk management strategies to address anticipated outcomes and irreducible uncertainty? How far do mechanisms for anticipation and management of risks converge or diverge among international institutions? The paper compares preliminary findings of how different international institutions accomplish risk anticipation and how they attempt to establish a causal link between anticipatory estimation and institutional problem-solving capacity in terms of sustainable mitigation, prevention and control. For this purpose, we address various global governance contexts and institutions that deal with global risks such as loss of biodiversity, food security as well as global energy resources and climate change.

3    New evaluation model for decision-making process of municipal governments for disaster management. Kato T, The University of Kitakyushu; Aso H, Infogram Inc.; Shoudai S, Crisis Management Department, City of Kitakyushu; Nakamura A, Fire and Disaster Management Bureau, City of Kitakyushu; Taninobu M, Fire and Disaster Management Bureau, City of Kitakyushu   tkato@kitakyu-u.ac.jp (95)

Abstract: This research will contribute to the disaster management strategies of municipal governments by illustrating the capacity of a municipal government in implementing disaster responses using a network of various departments within the government and with external collaborators. In the disaster response phase, municipal governments must quickly and smoothly process information and coordinate the decision-making process. Although there have been attempts to create an efficient organizational structure for disaster responses, such as the introduction of the incident command system, it is difficult to visualize and quantify the capacity of municipal governments and external organizations in coordinating activities. In this study, researchers developed a standardized list of emergency support functions and created a detailed network diagram of departments within the municipal government which would jointly process the information for each function. These diagrams can be used in a functional exercise to determine if each department was able to process and transmit information to other relevant departments as anticipated and in a timely manner. An ICT system was developed to facilitate the documentation of activities by each department in response to trainings and evaluations of organized disaster responses. These ideas and the ICT system were examined in detail and good results were obtained in one of the largest functional exercises in Japan in January 18, 2014. The functional exercise, which involved 488 personnel, was organized to evaluate the City of Kitakyushu’s disaster responses to large earthquakes and tsunamis, as well as cooperative organizations. Our quantitative evaluation of the exercise suggests the need for further improvements in the logistics of emergency support functions.

4    An analytical framework to assess the “quality of decision” in terms of major risks regulation. Merad M., INERIS; Dechy N., IRSN; Dehouck L., ENS Rennes; Lassagne M., ENSAM Paris   myriam.merad@ineris.fr (241)

Abstract: This paper aims at sharing some lessons learned by practitioners and researchers in terms of risk regulation when facing uncertainties and ambiguities inherent and induced by the occurrence and the management of major risks, either technological, natural or health diseases. On one hand, we have noticed that there are significant differences when analyzing the several frameworks in these domains, either from risk regulations (risk averse approach) and from business point of view (risk taking approach). On the other hand, we have observed how scientific segmentation of problems can increase blindness or some blind spots which can weaken major risks prevention policies. The paper is structured as following. - We will first discuss some key aspects of public risk regulation focusing on how an analytical framework to assess the “quality” of decision process can contribute to a more sustainable major risks’ governance. - We will then describe the different types of risk regulation situations based on real case studies analysis (ex. Air pollution). - We will finally present what we means by “quality of decision process” and conclude by suggesting some key challenges for risk and policy analysts.



[back to schedule]