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

Wednesday 22-07-2015

Can Risk Goverance Follow the Pace of Technology Innovation? Cognitive Factors and Perception of Emerging Risk

Room: Aspiration   11:00–12:30

Chair(s): Aleksandar Jovanovic

1    Education and certification for enhanced risk governance. Weis Udo, Steinbeis University; Jovanovic S., Steinbeis University (379)

Abstract: The contribution presents the program of academic education and professional certification established at Steinbeis University Berlin, Germany (Steinbeis Transfer Institute Advanced Risk Technologies, Stuttgart) in close collaboration with European and international institutions (universities, R&D institutions and industrial companies). The study program has been developed in the framework of several national and EU projects, the EU project iNTeg-Risk having a particularly important role among them. The concept of the study integrates conventional academic lecturing with (a) maximum effort to match student's academic and/or professional development goals, (b) the "study & work" concept of Steinbeis and (c) orientation towards "global market of risk". The program comprises over 40 courses (10 thematic modules) in the area of risk, from introduction, over asset and HSSE related risks, towards risks governance, business related risks and special topics such as, e.g., emerging risks. The Master Program is accompanied by the professional Certification program, which allows gradual entry and specialization in risk engineering and management. The module risks governance includes topics such as framework corporate social responsibility (CSR) applications to industrial companies, the International Risk Governance Framework and its elements, Emerging risks analysis, International standards (e.g. ISO 31000). A separate part of the courses is dedicated to the overview of specific methods and techniques (such as those in ISO 31010, e.g. Delphi), as well as to the tools and instruments facilitating the application by industry, governments and public bodies.

2    Improving safety and resilience of underground storage infrastructure. Aurkari P., VTT; Sipilä S., Helsinki; Satu T., VTT (380)

Abstract: The issues of safety and resilience of new technology for urban underground fuel storage have been considered from the point of view of initial evidence and potential improvements, when no comparable incident statistics was found to be available. To support safe operability and availability of the generating capacity, the emphasis was on the emerging issues of self-heating fires, freezing and other hazards in the fully automated storage. In comparison to conventional above-ground stockpiles, the underground storage has the advantages of reducing emissions of dust, CO2 and noise, and limiting employee exposure through automated remote operation. However, the new technology also implies more limited access in case of disturbance, and the challenge can be further exacerbated under exceptional circumstances during construction, unplanned maintenance or process disturbance that can call for human intervention. The observed incidents have been reviewed and improvements have been sought from parallel features of other technology and from lessons related to the individual incidents. The post-incident experience suggests benefits from the application of safety-related leading indicators.

3    Using selected iNTeg-Risk results (RiskRadar, Methods Mart, Notion Clustering). Dobes P., VSB; Dlabka J, VSB; Rehacek J., VSB; Budisova B., VSB (381)

Abstract: Today's appearance of safety & security science and related basic concepts and issues presents extensive jungle to those academic and R&D workers, who is trying to keep in touch with that moving train and understand at least selected concepts and basic directions of this scientific branch. Especially, when we are trying to teach our students about those principles in right sense, within latest best safety & security knowledge & practice, simultaneously participating on right science and making it right. Basic questions - like: „how to teach risk analysis, risk governance, risk communication, emergency planning, better?“, „how to participate on latest scientific projects and activities?“, etc., always stands behind us. Main 7 outputs of recently finished iNTeg-Risk project helping us to find valuable answers on some of mentioned questions as well as giving us nice tools and examples, which could be used during lessons for students and also while consultations are provided to our government bodies (extensive amount of risk analysis methods, briefly described in Methods Mart; large set of new emerging risks, daily updated from databases of Twitter and presented through Risk Radar; interesting and stimulating Notion Clustering (S-RDI) tool, which fostering to think on new possible safety research themes and new views useful within already solved projects). The contribution presents several examples, how selected main outputs of iNTeg-Risk project, was and in fact could be used within university and government environment.

4    Early warnings for extreme risks: when are they feasible? when are they useful? Goble R., Clark University (382)

Abstract: Sirens that warn of an impending tsunami, hurricane-tracking centers, the INTeg-Risk Risk Radar: warning systems are a key component of efforts to prevent and ameliorate many hazards. Among such hazards, we can distinguish extreme risks as those that threaten to overwhelm protections and response systems including warning systems. An event may come as a complete surprise; or a warning may not succeed in preventing harm. Yet even among catastrophic possibilities, some can be more or less likely and have more or less catastrophic consequences. Thus, it is worthwhile to consider what can be accomplished with warnings even when predictive capabilities are limited and so are capabilities for prevention and reducing harm. The design of a useful warning system must match critical characteristics of the hazards considered: time scales fast or slow, spatial scales, the nature of the affected population, the institutions involved with their histories and mandates, public awareness and public perceptions of the risks, the state of scientific knowledge and uncertainty, and potential links with other hazards. But a key aspect of warning system design applies generally across a broad spectrum of hazards. A salient observation was made by Gilbert White 70 years ago: "Floods are an act of God, but flood losses are largely an act of man." Even a rapid survey of catastrophes over the years shows that complacency within responsible institutions has been a major contributor to the losses experienced in many different extreme events. A critical challenge for the INTeg-Risk Risk Radar and for any other warning system is to discourage complacency and, instead, to foster a culture of vigilance within the institutions that use it.

5    Discussion: Post-iNTeg-Risk initiatives and developments – the European Common House of Industrial Safety. Jovanovic A., EU-VRi / Univ. of Stuttgart / Steinbeis; Renn O., Univ. of Stuttgart; Salvi O., EU-VRi / Ineris Dev. (383)

Abstract: The fragmentation of research efforts in the area of industrial safety has long been identified as a European weakness. Industrial safety is fragmented not only over the EU member states, but also within some of the states on the regional level, as well as the across the industry branches. The opinion that each EU member state, each industrial branch, each technology owner will be the best to know how to achieve safety is well spread. Yet, the experiences of the last decade show clearly that the “sum of single safety cannot guarantee the global safety”. The “Common House” of European Industrial Safety will help overcome the problems by developing of a monitoring system and a forum to debate developments and needs, identify gaps and opportunities, establishing priorities in order to create a sound, authoritative, consensual, science-based, economy pushed, society-driven Europe-wide knowledge base of industrial safety science and engineering. The main expected impact would be the consolidation of scattered research and development efforts for a more cohesive, efficient approach to industrial safety, avoiding duplications and gaps, including collaboration with other “EU Common Houses” (e.g. Materials). The main innovative projects should include aspects such as the developing the European Emerging Risks Radar, improving the basis for integration of the safety and security issues in European industry, assessing resilience of infrastructures exposed to multiple complex risks and application of the newest cognitive science research results in improving industrial safety and public acceptance of new technologies.

[back to schedule]