Risk assessment
This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. (February 2021) |
Risk assessment determines possible mishaps, their likelihood and consequences, and the
More precisely, risk assessment identifies and analyses potential (future) events that may negatively impact individuals, assets, and/or the environment (i.e. hazard analysis). It also makes judgments "on the tolerability of the risk on the basis of a risk analysis" while considering influencing factors (i.e. risk evaluation).[1][2]
Categories
Individual risk assessment
Risk assessments can be done in individual cases, including in patient and physician interactions.[3] In the narrow sense chemical risk assessment is the assessment of a health risk in response to environmental exposures.[4] The ways statistics are expressed and communicated to an individual, both through words and numbers impact his or her interpretation of benefit and harm. For example, a
Systems risk assessment
Risk assessment can also be made on a much larger systems theory scale, for example assessing the risks of an ecosystem or an interactively complex mechanical, electronic, nuclear, and biological system or a hurricane (a complex meteorological and geographical system). Systems may be defined as linear and nonlinear (or complex), where linear systems are predictable and relatively easy to understand given a change in input, and non-linear systems unpredictable when inputs are changed.[7] As such, risk assessments of non-linear/complex systems tend to be more challenging.
In the engineering of
Concept
Rapid technological change, increasing scale of industrial complexes, increased system integration, market competition, and other factors have been shown to increase societal risk in the past few decades.[1] As such, risk assessments become increasingly critical in mitigating accidents, improving safety, and improving outcomes. Risk assessment consists of an objective evaluation of risk in which assumptions and uncertainties are clearly considered and presented. This involves identification of risk (what can happen and why), the potential consequences, the probability of occurrence, the tolerability or acceptability of the risk, and ways to mitigate or reduce the probability of the risk.[2] Optimally, it also involves documentation of the risk assessment and its findings, implementation of mitigation methods, and review of the assessment (or risk management plan), coupled with updates when necessary.[1] Sometimes risks can be deemed acceptable, meaning the risk "is understood and tolerated ... usually because the cost or difficulty of implementing an effective countermeasure for the associated vulnerability exceeds the expectation of loss."[10]
Mild versus wild risk
Benoit Mandelbrot distinguished between "mild" and "wild" risk and argued that risk assessment and
Mathematical conceptualization
To see the risk management process expressed mathematically, one can define expected risk as the sum over individual risks, , which can be computed as the product of potential losses, , and their probabilities, :
Even though for some risks , we might have , if the probability is small compared to , its estimation might be based only on a smaller number of prior events, and hence, more uncertain. On the other hand, since , must be larger than , so decisions based on this uncertainty would be more consequential, and hence, warrant a different approach.
This becomes important when we consider the variance of risk
as a large changes the value.
Financial decisions, such as insurance, express loss in terms of dollar amounts. When risk assessment is used for public health or environmental decisions, the loss can be quantified in a common metric such as a country's currency or some numerical measure of a location's quality of life. For public health and environmental decisions, the loss is simply a verbal description of the outcome, such as increased cancer incidence or incidence of birth defects. In that case, the "risk" is expressed as
If the risk estimate takes into account information on the number of individuals exposed, it is termed a "population risk" and is in units of expected increased cases per time period. If the risk estimate does not take into account the number of individuals exposed, it is termed an "individual risk" and is in units of incidence rate per time period. Population risks are of more use for cost/benefit analysis; individual risks are of more use for evaluating whether risks to individuals are "acceptable".
Quantitative risk assessment
In quantitative risk assessment, an
The usefulness of quantitative risk assessment has been questioned, however. Barry Commoner, Brian Wynne and other critics have expressed concerns that risk assessment tends to be overly quantitative and reductive. For example, they argue that risk assessments ignore qualitative differences among risks. Some charge that assessments may drop out important non-quantifiable or inaccessible information, such as variations among the classes of people exposed to hazards, or social amplification.[12] Furthermore, Commoner[13] and O'Brien[14] claim that quantitative approaches divert attention from precautionary or preventative measures.[15] Others, like Nassim Nicholas Taleb consider risk managers little more than "blind users" of statistical tools and methods.[16]
Process
Older textbooks distinguish between the term
- establish the context, which restricts the range of hazards to be considered. It is also necessary to identify the potential parties or assets which may be affected by the threat, and the potential consequences to them if the hazard is activated.
- Hazard identification, an identification of visible and implied hazards and determining the qualitative nature of the potential adverse consequences of each hazard. Without a potential adverse consequence, there is no hazard.
- health hazards where the mechanism of injury is toxicity or repetitive injury, particularly where the effect is cumulative.
- consequence analysis. For other hazards, the consequences may either occur or not, and the severity may be extremely variable even when the triggering conditions are the same. This is typical of many biological hazards as well as a large range of safety hazards. Exposure to a pathogen may or may not result in actual infection, and the consequences of infection may also be variable. Similarly, a fall from the same place may result in minor injury or death, depending on unpredictable details. In these cases, estimates must be made of reasonably likely consequences and associated probability of occurrence.
A risk evaluation means that judgements are made on the tolerability of the identified risks, leading to risk acceptance. When risk analysis and risk evaluation are made at the same time, it is called risk assessment.[1]
As of 2023, chemical risk assessment follows these 4 steps:[4]
- hazard characterization
- exposure assessment
- dose-responsemodeling
- risk characterization.
There is tremendous variability in the
The process of risk assessment may be somewhat informal at the individual social level, assessing economic and household risks,[17][18] or a sophisticated process at the strategic corporate level. However, in both cases, ability to anticipate future events and create effective strategies for mitigating them when deemed unacceptable is vital.
At the individual level, identifying objectives and risks, weighing their importance, and creating plans, may be all that is necessary. At the strategic organisational level, more elaborate policies are necessary, specifying acceptable levels of risk, procedures to be followed within the organisation, priorities, and allocation of resources.[19]: 10
At the strategic corporate level, management involved with the project produce project level risk assessments with the assistance of the available expertise as part of the planning process and set up systems to ensure that required actions to manage the assessed risk are in place. At the dynamic level, the personnel directly involved may be required to deal with unforeseen problems in real time. The tactical decisions made at this level should be reviewed after the operation to provide feedback on the effectiveness of both the planned procedures and decisions made in response to the contingency.
Dose dependent risk
- Dose-Response Analysis, is determining the relationship between dose and the type of adverse response and/or probability or the incidence of effect (dose-response assessment). The complexity of this step in many contexts derives mainly from the need to extrapolate results from experimental animals (e.g. no effect concentration. In developing such a dose, to account for the largely unknown effects of animal to human extrapolations, increased variability in humans, or missing data, a prudent approach is often adopted by including safety or uncertainty factors in the estimate of the "safe" dose, typically a factor of 10 for each unknown step.
- Exposure Quantification, aims to determine the amount of a contaminant (dose) that individuals and populations will receive, either as a contact level (e.g., concentration in ambient air) or as intake (e.g., daily dose ingested from drinking water). This is done by examining the results of the discipline of exposure assessment. As a different location, lifestyle, and other factors likely influence the amount of contaminant that is received, a range or distribution of possible values is generated in this step. Particular care is taken to determine the exposure of the susceptible population(s).
The results of these steps are combined to produce an estimate of risk. Because of the different susceptibilities and exposures, this risk will vary within a population. An uncertainty analysis is usually included in a health risk assessment.
Dynamic risk assessment
During an emergency response, the situation and hazards are often inherently less predictable than for planned activities (non-linear). In general, if the situation and hazards are predictable (linear), standard operating procedures should deal with them adequately. In some emergencies, this may also hold true, with the preparation and trained responses being adequate to manage the situation. In these situations, the operator can manage risk without outside assistance, or with the assistance of a backup team who are prepared and available to step in at short notice.
Other emergencies occur where there is no previously planned protocol, or when an outsider group is brought in to handle the situation, and they are not specifically prepared for the scenario that exists but must deal with it without undue delay. Examples include police, fire department, disaster response, and other public service rescue teams. In these cases, ongoing risk assessment by the involved personnel can advise appropriate action to reduce risk.[19] HM Fire Services Inspectorate has defined dynamic risk assessment (DRA) as:
The continuous assessment of risk in the rapidly changing circumstances of an operational incident, in order to implement the control measures necessary to ensure an acceptable level of safety.[19]
Dynamic risk assessment is the final stage of an integrated safety management system that can provide an appropriate response during changing circumstances. It relies on experience, training and continuing education, including effective debriefing to analyse not only what went wrong, but also what went right, and why, and to share this with other members of the team and the personnel responsible for the planning level risk assessment.[19]
Fields of application
The application of risk assessment procedures is common in a wide range of fields, and these may have specific legal obligations, codes of practice, and standardised procedures. Some of these are listed here.
General human health
There are many resources that provide human health risk information:
The
- TOXNET (databases on hazardous chemicals, environmental health, and toxic releases),[21]
- the Household Products Database (potential health effects of chemicals in over 10,000 common household products),[22]
- TOXMAP (maps of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund and Toxics Release Inventory data).
The United States Environmental Protection Agency provides basic information about environmental health risk assessments for the public for a wide variety of possible environmental exposures.[23]
The Environmental Protection Agency began actively using risk assessment methods to protect drinking water in the United States after the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. The law required the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study on drinking water issues, and in its report, the NAS described some methodologies for doing risk assessments for chemicals that were suspected carcinogens, recommendations that top EPA officials have described as perhaps the study's most important part.[24]
Considering the increase in junk food and its toxicity, FDA required in 1973 that cancer-causing compounds must not be present in meat at concentrations that would cause a cancer risk greater than 1 in a million over a lifetime. The US Environmental Protection Agency provides extensive information about ecological and environmental risk assessments for the public via its risk assessment portal.
For non-cancer health effects, the terms reference dose (RfD) or reference concentration (RfC) are used to describe the safe level of exposure in a dichotomous fashion. Newer ways of communicating the risk is the probabilistic risk assessment.[27]
Small sub-populations
When risks apply mainly to small sub-populations, it can be difficult to determine when intervention is necessary. For example, there may be a risk that is very low for everyone, other than 0.1% of the population. It is necessary to determine whether this 0.1% is represented by:
- all infants younger than X days or
- recreational users of a particular product.
If the risk is higher for a particular sub-population because of abnormal exposure rather than susceptibility, strategies to further reduce the exposure of that subgroup are considered. If an identifiable sub-population is more susceptible due to inherent genetic or other factors, public policy choices must be made. The choices are:
- to set policies for protecting the general population that are protective of such groups, e.g. for children when data exists, the Clean Air Act for populations such as asthmatics or
- not to set policies, because the group is too small, or the costs too high.
Acceptable risk criteria
Acceptable risk is a risk that is understood and tolerated usually because the cost or difficulty of implementing an effective countermeasure for the associated vulnerability exceeds the expectation of loss.[28]
The idea of not increasing lifetime risk by more than one in a million has become commonplace in public health discourse and policy.[29] It is a heuristic measure. It provides a numerical basis for establishing a negligible increase in risk.
Environmental decision making allows some discretion for deeming individual risks potentially "acceptable" if less than one in ten thousand chance of increased lifetime risk. Low risk criteria such as these provide some protection for a case where individuals may be exposed to multiple chemicals e.g. pollutants, food additives, or other chemicals.[citation needed]
In practice, a true zero-risk is possible only with the suppression of the risk-causing activity.[citation needed]
Stringent requirements of 1 in a million may not be technologically feasible or may be so prohibitively expensive as to render the risk-causing activity unsustainable, resulting in the optimal degree of intervention being a balance between risks vs. benefit.[citation needed] For example, emissions from hospital incinerators result in a certain number of deaths per year. However, this risk must be balanced against the alternatives. There are public health risks, as well as economic costs, associated with all options. The risk associated with no incineration is the potential spread of infectious diseases or even no hospitals. Further investigation identifies options such as separating noninfectious from infectious wastes, or air pollution controls on a medical incinerator.
Intelligent thought about a reasonably full set of options is essential. Thus, it is not unusual for there to be an iterative process between analysis, consideration of options, and follow up analysis.[citation needed]
Public health
In the context of
An occupational risk assessment is an evaluation of how much potential danger a hazard can have to a person in a workplace environment. The assessment takes into account possible scenarios in addition to the probability of their occurrence and the results.[31] The five types of hazards to be aware of are safety (those that can cause injury), chemicals, biological, physical, and ergonomic (those that can cause musculoskeletal disorders).[32] To appropriately access hazards there are two parts that must occur. Firstly, there must be an "exposure assessment" which measures the likelihood of worker contact and the level of contact. Secondly, a "risk characterization" must be made which measures the probability and severity of the possible health risks.[33]
Human settlements
The importance of risk assessments to manage the consequences of climate change and variability is recalled in the global frameworks for disaster risk reduction, adopted by the member countries of the United Nations at the end of the World Conferences held in Kobe (2005) and Sendai (2015). The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction brings attention to the local scale and encourages a holistic risk approach, which should consider all the hazards to which a community is exposed, the integration of technical-scientific knowledge with local knowledge, and the inclusion of the concept of risk in local plans to achieve a significant disaster reduction by 2030. Taking these principles into daily practice poses a challenge for many countries. The Sendai framework monitoring system highlights how little is known about the progress made from 2015 to 2019 in local disaster risk reduction.[34]
Sub-Saharan Africa
As of 2019, in the South of the Sahara, risk assessment is not yet an institutionalized practice. The exposure of human settlements to multiple hazards (hydrological and agricultural drought, pluvial, fluvial and coastal floods) is frequent and requires risk assessments on a regional, municipal, and sometimes individual human settlement scale. The multidisciplinary approach and the integration of local and technical-scientific knowledge are necessary from the first steps of the assessment. Local knowledge remains unavoidable to understand the hazards that threaten individual communities, the critical thresholds in which they turn into disasters, for the validation of
Auditing
For audits performed by an outside audit firm, risk assessment is a crucial stage before accepting an audit engagement. According to ISA315 Understanding the Entity and its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement, "the auditor should perform risk assessment procedures to obtain an understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control". Evidence relating to the auditor's risk assessment of a material misstatement in the client's financial statements. Then, the auditor obtains initial evidence regarding the classes of transactions at the client and the operating effectiveness of the client's internal controls. Audit risk is defined as the risk that the auditor will issue a clean unmodified opinion regarding the financial statements, when in fact the financial statements are materially misstated, and therefore do not qualify for a clean unmodified opinion. As a formula, audit risk is the product of two other risks: Risk of Material Misstatement and Detection Risk. This formula can be further broken down as follows:
Project management
In project management, risk assessment is an integral part of the risk management plan, studying the probability, the impact, and the effect of every known risk on the project, as well as the corrective action to take should an incident be implied by a risk occur.[40] Of special consideration in this area are the relevant codes of practice that are enforced in the specific jurisdiction. Understanding the regime of regulations that risk management must abide by is integral to formulating safe and compliant risk assessment practices.
Information security
Information technology risk assessment can be performed by a qualitative or quantitative approach, following different methodologies. One important difference[clarification needed] in risk assessments in information security is modifying the threat model to account for the fact that any adversarial system connected to the Internet has access to threaten any other connected system.[41] Risk assessments may therefore need to be modified to account for the threats from all adversaries, instead of just those with reasonable access as is done in other fields.
NIST Definition: The process of identifying risks to organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, reputation), organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation, resulting from the operation of an information system. Part of risk management incorporates threat and vulnerability analyses and considers mitigations provided by security controls planned or in place.[42]
There are various risk assessment methodologies and frameworks available which include NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF),[43] Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies (COBIT),[44] Factor Analysis of Information Risk (FAIR),[45] Operationally Critical Threat, Asset, and Vulnerability Evaluation (OCTAVE),[46] The Center for Internet Security Risk Assessment Method (CIS RAM),[47] and The Duty of Care Risk Analysis (DoCRA) Standard,[48] which helps define 'reasonable' security.
Cybersecurity
The Threat and Risk Assessment (TRA) process is part of risk management referring to risks related to
There are different methodologies for performing TRA (e.g., Harmonized TRA Methodology[49]), all utilize the following elements:[50][51][52] identifying of assets (what should be protected), identifying and assessing of the threats and vulnerabilities for the identified assets, determining the exploitability of the vulnerabilities, determining the levels of risk associated with the vulnerabilities (what are the implications if the assets were damaged or lost), and recommending a risk mitigation program.
Megainvestment projects
Software evolution
Studies have shown that early parts of the system development cycle such as requirements and design specifications are especially prone to error. This effect is particularly notorious in projects involving multiple stakeholders with different points of view. Evolutionary software processes offer an iterative approach to requirement engineering to alleviate the problems of uncertainty, ambiguity, and inconsistency inherent in software developments, including uncertainty, ambiguity, and inconsistency inherent in software developments.[clarification needed]
Shipping industry
In July 2010, shipping companies agreed to use standardized procedures in order to assess risk in key shipboard operations. These procedures were implemented as part of the amended ISM Code.[53]
Underwater diving
Formal risk assessment is a required component of most professional dive planning, but the format and methodology may vary. Consequences of an incident due to an identified hazard are generally chosen from a small number of standardised categories, and probability is estimated based on statistical data on the rare occasions when it is available, and on a best guess estimate based on personal experience and company policy in most cases. A simple matrix is often used to transform these inputs into a level of risk, generally expressed as unacceptable, marginal or acceptable. If unacceptable, measures must be taken to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, and the outcome of the risk assessment must be accepted by the affected parties before a dive commences. Higher levels of risk may be acceptable in special circumstances, such as military or search and rescue operations when there is a chance of recovering a survivor. Diving supervisors are trained in the procedures of hazard identification and risk assessment, and it is part of their planning and operational responsibility. Both health and safety hazards must be considered. Several stages may be identified. There is risk assessment done as part of the diving project planning, on site risk assessment which takes into account the specific conditions of the day, and dynamic risk assessment which is ongoing during the operation by the members of the dive team, particularly the supervisor and the working diver.[54][55]
In
Outdoor and wilderness adventure
In outdoor activities including commercial outdoor education, wilderness expeditions, and outdoor recreation, risk assessment refers to the analysis of the probability and magnitude of unfavorable outcomes such as injury, illness, or property damage due to environmental and related causes, compared to the human development or other benefits of outdoor activity. This is of particular importance as school programs and others weigh the benefits of youth and adult participation in various outdoor learning activities against the inherent and other hazards present in those activities. Schools, corporate entities seeking team-building experiences, parents/guardians, and others considering outdoor experiences expect or require[58] organizations to assess the hazards and risks of different outdoor activities—such as sailing, target shooting, hunting, mountaineering, or camping—and select activities with acceptable risk profiles.
Outdoor education, wilderness adventure, and other outdoor-related organizations should, and are in some jurisdictions required, to conduct risk assessments prior to offering programs for commercial purposes.[59][60][61]
Such organizations are given guidance on how to provide their risk assessments.[62]
Risk assessments for led outdoor activities form only one component of a comprehensive risk management plan, as many risk assessments use a basic linear-style thinking that does not employ more modern risk management practice employing complex socio-technical systems theory.[63][64]
Environment
Ecological risk assessment is complicated by the fact that there are many nonchemical stressors that substantially influence ecosystems, communities, and individual plants and animals, as well as across landscapes and regions.[67][68] Defining the undesired (adverse) event is a political or policy judgment, further complicating applying traditional risk analysis tools to ecological systems. Much of the policy debate surrounding ecological risk assessment is over defining precisely what is an adverse event.[69]
Biodiversity
Biodiversity Risk Assessments evaluate risks to
Law
Risk assessments are used in numerous stages during the legal process and are developed to measure a wide variety of items, such as recidivism rates, potential pretrial issues, probation/parole, and to identify potential interventions for defendants.[73] Clinical psychologists, forensic psychologists, and other practitioners are responsible for conducting risk assessments.[73][74][75] Depending on the risk assessment tool, practitioners are required to gather a variety of background information on the defendant or individual being assessed. This information includes their previous criminal history (if applicable) and other records (i.e. Demographics, Education, Job Status, Medical History), which can be accessed through direct interview with the defendant or on-file records.[73]
In the pre-trial stage, a widely used risk assessment tool is the Public Safety Assessment,[76] which predicts failure to appear in court, likelihood of a new criminal arrest while on pretrial release, and likelihood of a new violent criminal arrest while on pretrial release. Multiple items are observed and taken into account based on which aspect of the PSA is being focused, and like all other actuarial risk assessments, each item is assigned a weighted amount to produce a final score.[73] Detailed information such as transparency on the items the PSA factors and how scores are distributed are accessible online.[77]
For defendants who have been incarcerated, risk assessments are used to determine their likelihood of recidivism and inform sentence length decisions. Risk assessments also aid parole/probation officers in determining the level of supervision a probationer should be subjected to and what interventions could be implemented to improve offender risk status.[74] The Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) is a risk assessment too designed to measure pretrial release risk, general recidivism risk, and violent recidivism risk. Detailed information on scoring and algorithms for COMPAS are not accessible to the general public.
See also
- Acceptable loss – Military euphemism
- Benefit shortfall
- Control self-assessment – Technique to assess process effectiveness
- Cost overrun – Unexpected incurred costs in excess of budgeted amounts
- Digital continuity
- Duty of care – Type of legal obligation
- Edwards v National Coal Board – 1949 English Court of Appeal ruling on the meaning of "reasonably practicable"
- Extreme risk – risk of very bad outcomes or "high consequence", but of low probability.
- Environmental impact assessment – Assessment of the environmental consequences of a decision before action
- Flood risk assessment – assessment of the risk of flooding from all flooding mechanisms, identification of flood mitigation measures and recommendation on actions to be taken before and during a flood
- Form 696 – Metropolitan Police risk assessment
- Global catastrophic risk – Potentially harmful worldwide events
- Hazard – Situation or object that can cause damage
- Hazard analysis – The identification of present hazards as the first step in a process to assess risk
- Hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) – Systematic preventive approach to food safety risk assessment in food
- Health impact assessment – method to assess impacts of an action or risk factor on health and to produce a set of evidence-based recommendations to inform decision-making
- Horizon scanning – Methodology in futures studies
- Information assurance – Multi-disciplinary methods for decision support systems security
- Index of auditing-related articles
- ISO 28000 – Management system standard
- ISO 31000 – Family of standards relating to risk management
- ISSOW– standard in the Petroleum industry
- Megaprojects and Risk – 2003 book by Bent Flyvbjerg, Nils Bruzelius and Werner Rothengatter
- Network theory in risk assessment
- Occupational exposure banding – Process to assign chemicals into categories corresponding to permissible exposure concentrations
- Optimism bias – Type of cognitive bias
- PIMEX a video exposure monitoring method
- Planning fallacy – Cognitive bias of underestimating time needed
- Probabilistic risk assessment – Methodology for evaluating risks
- Probit model – Statistical regression where the dependent variable can take only two values
- Project risk management – activities to minimize project risks and ensure a project completes on time and on budget, while meeting its objectives
- Reference class forecasting – Method of predicting the future
- Reliability engineering – Sub-discipline of systems engineering that emphasizes dependability
- Risk – The possibility of something bad happening
- Risk assessment using qualifiers – estimate of risk associated with a particular hazard using qualifiers like high likelihood, low likelihood, etc
- Risk-based auditing – type of auditing which focuses upon the analysis and management of risks with the greatest potential impact
- Risk management tools – tool addressing uncertainty by identifying and generating metrics, parameterizing, prioritizing, and developing responses, and tracking risk
- Risk matrix – Risk assessment comparing the likelihood of a risk to its severity
- Safety engineering – Engineering discipline which assures that engineered systems provide acceptable levels of safety
- Security risk– The possibility of something bad happening
- Statistical risk
- Strategic misrepresentation– Cognitive bias of underestimating time needed
- Gordon–Loeb model for cyber security investments
References
References
- ^ ISBN 9780470637647.
- ^ ISBN 9781118911044.
- ^ ISSN 1104-1250. Retrieved 2018-06-14.
- ^ PMID 36635753.
- PMID 25531451.
- PMID 28402085.
- ISBN 9780470637647.
- ^ ISBN 9783319309316.
- SSRN 2171117.
- ^ Shirey R (August 2007). "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2". Network Working Group. The IETF Trust: 9. Retrieved 19 July 2018.
- ISBN 9781846682629.
- .
- ^ Commoner B. "Comparing apples to oranges: Risk of cost/benefit analysis". In Iannone AP (ed.). Contemporary moral controversies in technology. pp. 64–65.
- ISBN 0-262-65053-3. Retrieved 27 September 2010.
- ISBN 978-1-4616-4399-9.
- ^ Taleb NN (September 2008). The fourth quadrant: a map of the limits of statistics (PDF). An Edge original essay (Report).
- S2CID 14180040.
- ^ Nakaš N (21 November 2017). "Three Lessons About Risk Management from Everyday Life". Knowledge Hub. Center of Excellence in Finance. Retrieved 19 July 2018.
- ^ a b c d Lock G (June 2017). Phillips M (ed.). "Public Safety Diving-Dynamic Risk Assessment" (PDF). PS Diver Magazine (116): 9. Retrieved 20 June 2017.
- National Library of Medicine. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- NLM. May 2012. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- ^ "Household Products Database". U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services. January 2013. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- ^ "Risk Assessment Portal". EPA. 13 May 2013. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- ^ EPA Alumni Association: Senior EPA officials discuss early implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Video, Transcript (see pages 11,14).
- ^ "Risk Assessment". www.epa.gov. US Environmental Protection Agency. 2013-09-26. Retrieved 2016-04-07.
- ISBN 9781118184141.
- PMID 36635712.
- . Informational.
- ^ Hunter PR, Fewtrell L (2001). "Acceptable Risk" (PDF). World Health Organization.
- PMID 9143722. This source includes a useful historical survey of prior food safety regulation.
- .
- ^ "OSHA's 5 Workplace Hazards". Grainger Industrial Supply.
- PMID 26302336.
- ISBN 978-92-1-004180-5. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
- .
- .
- .
- ^ International Organization for Standardization (8 November 2017). "ISO Guide 73: 2009. Risk management – Vocabulary". ISO. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
- ^ .
- ^ Managing Project Risks - Retrieved May 20th, 2010
- S2CID 24580989.
- ^ "Risk assessment". NIST Computer Security Resource Center Glossary. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
- ^ "NIST". NIST. 30 November 2016.
- ^ "ISACA COBIT". ISACA.
- ^ "FAIR". FAIR.
- ^ "Carnegie Mellon University". Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. 31 August 1999.
- ^ "Center for Internet Security". Center for Internet Security (CIS).
- ^ "DoCRA". Duty of Care Risk Analysis (DoCRA).
- ^ Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (2018-08-15). "Canadian Centre for Cyber Security". Canadian Centre for Cyber Security. Retrieved 2021-08-09.
- S2CID 236706551.
- ^ "An Overview of Threat and Risk Assessment | SANS Institute". www.sans.org. Retrieved 2021-08-09.
- ^ Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (2006-03-06). "Rescinded [2019-06-28] - Security Organization and Administration Standard". www.tbs-sct.gc.ca. Retrieved 2021-08-09.
- ^ "ISM CODE – Amendments from 1st July 2010 Risk Assessment". Archived from the original on 27 April 2014.
- ^ "Diving Regulations 2009". Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 – Regulations and Notices – Government Notice R41. Pretoria: Government Printer. Archived from the original on 4 November 2016. Retrieved 3 November 2016 – via Southern African Legal Information Institute.
- ^ Staff (August 2016). "15 - General safety requirements". Guidance for diving supervisors IMCA D 022 (Revision 1 ed.). London, UK: International Marine Contractors Association. pp. 15–5.
- ^ Staff (1977). "The Diving at Work Regulations 1997". Statutory Instruments 1997 No. 2776 Health and Safety. Kew, Richmond, Surrey: Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO). Retrieved 6 November 2016.
- ISBN 978-0-915539-10-9.
- ^ "2018 Accreditation Rubric" (PDF). Seattle, Washington: Northwest Association of Independent Schools.
- ^ "Adventure Activities Regulations". supportadventure.co.nz.
- ^ "Health and Safety at Work (Adventure Activities) Regulations 2016 (LI 2016/19)". New Zealand Legislation.
- ^ "Adventure Activities Licensing". The Health and Safety Executive (HSE). gov.uk.
- ^ "Adventure activities". Work Safe. New Zealand.
- .
- ^ Baierlein J (2019). Risk Management for Outdoor Programs: a Guide to Safety in Outdoor Education, Recreation and Adventure. Seattle, WA: Viristar LLC.
- ^ PMID 27782171.
- S2CID 18825042.
- PMID 32827825.
- OCLC 74274833.
- .
- S2CID 82412136.
- ISSN 1755-263X.
- ISSN 1488-8386.
- ^ a b c d "What is Risk Assessment". Bureau of Justice Assistance. U.S. Department of Justice.
- ^ PMID 26666966.
- ^ Heilbrun K (2009). "Risk Assessment in Evidence-Based Sentencing: Context and Promising Sues". Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice. 1: 127–142.
- ^ "Advancing Pretrial Policy & Research: What is the PSA?". Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research (APPR).
- ^ "How the PSA Works". Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research (APPR).
Further reading
- Dorne JC, Kass GE, Bordajandi LR, Amzal B, Bertelsen U, Castoldi AF, et al. (2011). "Chapter 2. Human Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals: Principles and Applications". In Sigel A, Sigel H, Sigel RK (eds.). Metal Ions in Toxicology. Metal Ions in Life Sciences. RSC Publishing. pp. 27–60. S2CID 24530234.
- Mumtaz MM, Hansen H, Pohl HR (2011). "Chapter 3. Mixtures and Their Risk Assessment in Toxicology". In Sigel A, Sigel H, Sigel RK (eds.). Metal Ions in Toxicology. Metal Ions in Life Sciences. RSC Publishing. pp. 61–80. ISBN 978-1-84973-091-4.
- Committee on Risk Assessment of Hazardous Air Pollutants (1994), Science and judgment in risk assessment, Washington, D.C: ISBN 978-0-309-04894-1, retrieved 27 September 2010
- Hallenbeck WH (1986). Quantitative risk assessment for environmental and occupational health. Chelsea, Mich.: Lewis Publishers.
- Harremoës P (ed.). Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000.
- Lachin JM. Biostatistical methods: the assessment of relative risks.
- Lerche I, Glaesser W (2006). Environmental risk assessment : quantitative measures, anthropogenic influences, human impact. Berlin: Springer. ISBN 978-3-540-26249-7. Retrieved 27 September 2010.
- Kluger J (November 26, 2006). "How Americans Are Living Dangerously". Time. Archived from the original on November 27, 2006. Retrieved 27 September 2010. Also published as December 4 cover title: "Why We Worry About the Wrong Things: The Psychology of Risk" |work=Time
- A Review of risk assessment methodologies (Report). Washington: U.S: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, for the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Technology. 1983.
- Mayo DG (1997). "Sociological versus metascientific views of technological risk assessment". In Shrader-Frechette K, Westra L (eds.). Technology and values. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-8476-8631-5. Retrieved 27 September 2010.
- Rozell DJ (2020). Dangerous Science: Science Policy and Risk Analysis for Scientists and Engineers. London: Ubiquity Press. S2CID 213952232.