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

Tuesday 21-07-2015

Seeking Integrated Approach for Risk Governance in Asian Countries

Room: Creation   15:30–17:00

Chair(s): Makiko Matsuo

1    Clarifying Concepts for \"integrated risk governance\" Kishimoto Atsuo    (17)

Abstract: This study seeks to clarify concepts for constructing integrated risk governance in Asian countries in order to respond to such new ideas as \"global risks\", \"all-hazard approach\", \"emerging risks\" in the age of globalization. One central trigger is obviously the event of September 11th 2001. Another is the increasing complexity and systematic nature of risk. The usage of the terms \"safety\" and \"security\" is first compared to identify the differences and common traits between them. After reviewing various disciplines, it is found that \"safety\" has been commonly applied to unintentional hazards, such as pollutions, accidents and natural disasters. \"Security\" on the other hand refers to intentional or malicious acts such as crimes, terrorism and wars. \"Safety\" has been defined as \"free from risk which is not tolerable\" and, partly for that reason, the ‘safety community’ gradually incorporated the “risk” concept and moved on to risk-based approach. In the field of ‘security’, the conceptual basis of ‘risk’ has to be carefully differentiated from a closely related notion of ‘threat’ which is often based on assessing a state’s intentions and capabilities to do harm. In the post-Cold War and post-9/11 world, risk has gained wider acceptance and is often viewed in terms of probabilities and consequences. A probabilistic risk calculus increasingly informs justifications presented by politicians on security policies. Finally, the definitions of and relationships between several key concepts, such as threat, hazard, safety, security, risk, and governance are summarized. The possibility of incorporating both the safety and security communities into \"integrated risk governance\" is discussed.

2    Nuclear-related Risk Governance Deficit after Fukushima. Matsuo Makiko    (14)

Abstract: a)Title and abstract Title: Nuclear-related Risk Governance Deficit after Fukushima Abstract: The risks we are facing today is multifaceted, complex and systematic in nature. The Great Eastern Japan Earthquake, subsequent Tsunami and the nuclear power plant accident in Fukushima is one clear typical example of such risk. This presentation explores governance deficit which was revealed after the Fukushima disaster through some specific case studies; emergency preparedness and severe accident management of nuclear facilities and food safety risk of radionuclides. The findings from these studies show the sources of governance deficit. Examples of such governance deficit includes; insufficient interaction among the related actors (ie. government agencies, industry and even among the academia etc); myopic one-sided handling of a certain risk that has resulted in regulatory gaps and discrepancies; sectionalism among and within which has prevented the effective decision making and hampered them from taking integrated approach. Despite the recognition of such deficits, the government is slow to respond. Few institutional reform has been carried out after the incident and the old structure is still dominant. The presentation identifies the sources of governance deficit and considers a way for overcoming the above mentioned challenges. b)List of authors Makiko Matsuo, Graduate School of Public Policy, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo Taketoshi Taniguchi, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo Hideaki Shiroyama, Graduate School of Public Policy, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo c)Contact information of presenter (submitter)


Abstract: Notwithstanding the views of sceptics, the view adopted in this paper is that climate change (CC) is real and ongoing. The study of human induced CC dates back to the 1800s. The more recent literature on human induction and responses to reducing risks associated with CC appears fall within two broad categories, namely adaptation to CC and mitigation against CC. The elicitation of response strategies in each category does inevitably rely on risk assessment with reference CC related events such as fires, droughts, floods and sea level rise. Customarily, risk assessment has relied on the estimation of event frequencies from time series data, and from there on, the estimation of event probabilities and probability distributions for quantifying event uncertainties. However, the extent of human induction on CC – especially during the past 4-5 decades – has been such that the reliance on time series data has become unreliable. This is because the both the intensities and frequencies of hazardous events appear to have increased manifold in recent times. For example, a “one in a hundred year” event now seems to recur more frequently than ever before. Therefore the framework for analysing the choice of appropriate policies requires alternative premises. The premise adopted herein is that the linkage between any economy and its supporting ecosystem is governed by the laws of thermodynamics and the principles of ecological resilience. Hence frameworks of economic performance that acknowledge this premise are capable of demonstrating extent of fragility that economic systems are exposed in the event of intensifying economic growth. Not surprisingly managing without growth figures as an appealing policy option.

4    National Risk Assessment Exercises and Networked Government in Singapore. Heng Yee Kuang    (13)

Abstract: Singapore hosts what has been claimed by its founders to be the world’s first Risk Assessment and Horizon-Scanning Centre based at its National Security Coordination Secretariat. This paper considers why and how national risk assessment exercises have been conducted in the context of Singapore, one of the few Asian countries to devote resources to such attempts to understand risk better. Taking two examples: the National Risk Assessment of Terrorist Financing and Money Laundering, and the Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning System (RAHS) established by the Singapore Government, the paper evaluates the underlying principles of governance and networked structures that appear to underpin such exercises. It concludes that several key characteristics emerge. Risks are viewed as complex, interlocking and constantly evolving. A networked government and inter-agency collaboration is critical to undertaking holistic and comprehensive risk assessments. There is also an emphasis on partnering with external actors and stakeholders not only in order to access state-of-the-art methodologies, concepts and modelling software, but crucially to enable effective risk mitigation responses in the field.

5    An Attempt for Integrated Risk Mapping and Governance Challenge in Japan. Shiroyama Hideaki    (15)

Abstract: a) Title and abstract Title: An attempt for integrated risk mapping and governance challenge in Japan Abstract: The socio political system of our days are characterized by increasing multi-layered interconnectedness. In addition, as OECD report on systemic risk puts it, the forces shaping these changes are many and varied. Many developed countries are now considering an approach for integrated risk governance and national risk assessment. However, in Asian countries, such movement is limited and the issue must be seriously considered. To cope with such complexity of risk, risk mapping, that is, the identification of \\\"all hazards\\\" that we are (and/or potentially) exposed to are urgently in need. As one of such effort, the University of Tokyo has conducted a web-based survey, risk landscape in Japan, to find major risks that would have impact in the coming ten years. The survey aims at visualization of the relation and structure of identified risks in different fields and levels (ie; society, economy, geopolitics, environment and technology) in Japanese context. The presentation analyzes the result of this survey and considers what governance structure is needed in the management of such risks. It further explores the obstacles and challenge to institutionalize integrated approach in risk governance in Japan. b)List of authors Hideaki Shiroyama, Graduate School of Public Policy, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo Taketoshi Taniguchi, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo Atsuo Kishimoto, Graduate School of Public Policy, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo Makiko Matsuo, Graduate School of Public Policy, Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo c)Contact information of presenter (submitter)

6    Seeking Integrated Approach for Risk Governance in Asian Countries. Kishimoto Atsuo, the University of Tokyo; Matsuo Makiko, the University of Tokyo; Thampapillai Dodo J, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore; Heng Yee Kuang, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore; Shiroyama Hideaki, the University of Tokyo (12)

Abstract: Abstract of the session Risks we are dealing with are multi-dimensional and interacting to each other. The risk governance challenge we face today is how to avoid being bogged down in fragmented governance structure that only captures myopic issues. The source of fragmentation may partly be attributed to the different underlying concepts such as "risk" and "security" that frames the current sectoral governance structure. However, the changing nature of the problems asks for "integrated approach". For instance, the increasing complexity and systematic nature of risk (ie; climate change, pandemic, financial crisis etc.) calls for holistic views in handling those risks. The concept of security also needs to be adjusted or enlarged to cope not only with the traditional military issues but also other issues (ie; cyber security and critical infrastructure etc). To further the "integrated approach", this session considers possible common areas of interest between the community of "risk" and "security" and institutional governance structure for "integrated approach". The governance deficit problem revealed as a consequence of the Great Eastern Japan Earthquake, subsequent tsunami and Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant represents the fragmented governance structure. For example, the health risk issue caused by radionuclides was handled under several agencies all in charge of some part of the issue from different perspectives. This certainly calls for the "integrated approach" or the so called all hazard approach. In order to institutionalize "integrated approach" in risk governance, we would first need to map out all the hazards and explore the risks that needs to be prioritized. Such efforts are being conducted, for example; at international level, the World Economic Forum issues Global Risk Report every year; at the national level, Singapore has The Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning (RAHS) programme and is developing methods and tools for scenario planning; at the academic level, the University of Tokyo has recently done a web-based survey to identify national risk landscape. The aim of this session is three folds. The first is to consider the concept of risk and security and establish integrated framework to deal with various risks comprehensively. The second is to explore the governance challenge from specific cases (ie; the governance challenge resulting from Fukushima) and show some attempts for the integrated approach (ie: Horizon scanning in Singapore, the risk landscape report in Japan). Finally, we will discuss the governance challenge in institutionalizing "integrated approach" and possible way forward in Asian context. Required information; a) Title, b) List of authors for each presentation, c) Proposed agenda of symposium (chair, order of papers) are as follows (note: abstract of each presentation (details are submitted following this session proposal) Chair: Hideaki Shiroyama 1)On concepts for the "integrated risk governance," Atsuo Kishimoto (Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo), Yee Kuang Heng (Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore) 2)Nuclear-related Risk Governance Deficit after Fukushima, Makiko Matsuo (Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo), Taketoshi Taniguchi (Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo), Hideaki Shiroyama, (Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo) 3)On tools for priority setting for reducing risks from environmental economical perspectives, Dodo Thampapillai (Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS) 4)National Risk Assessment Exercises and Networked Government in Singapore, Kuang Heng (Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore) 5)Attempt for integrated risk governance approach in Japan, Hideaki Shiroyama (The University of Tokyo), Taketoshi Taniguchi (The University of Tokyo), Atsuo Kishimoto (The University of Tokyo) and Makiko Matsuo (The University of Tokyo) Note: We either use a wildcard or we have potential speakers from Bangladesh or Maldives in this session as coauthor/author to be confirmed.

[back to schedule]