Optimal risk regulation of monopolists with subjective risk assessment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daiki Kishishita ◽  
Susumu Sato
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Subjective Risk

scholarly journals Ship leadership, situation awareness and crew safety behavior - Pre-registered replications in two survey datasets

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjørn Sætrevik ◽  
Sigurd William Hystad
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Structural Equation Models ◽  
Self Report ◽  
General Situation ◽  
Safety Behavior ◽  
Cognitive States ◽  
Safety Work ◽  
Subjective Risk

Situation awareness is often assumed to be central for safety work. A self-reported measure can measure context-general situation awareness in large datasets and test its relationships with other variables relevant for safety. A previous study (Sætrevik and Hystad, 2017, Safety Science) found that authentic leadership predicted situation awareness and self-report of committing unsafe actions. Additionally, situation awareness predicted subjective risk assessment and committing unsafe actions. The current study performed pre-registered analyzes that attempted to replicate these effects in two novel survey datasets. Both datasets replicated the associations between situation awareness and unsafe actions, and between situation awareness and subjective risk assessment. The dataset that measured leadership found it to be associated with both situation awareness and unsafe actions. The pre-registered structural equation models explained large amounts of the variance in situation awareness and unsafe actions, and medium to large amounts of the variance in subjective risk assessment. We also tested adjusted models that incorporated more of the measured items and improved the validity of the measures. The study also supports the claim that a crew member’s cognitive states are associated with safety outcomes, and that leadership qualities may facilitate this relationship. This pre-registered replication in two novel datasets demonstrates the reliability of the previously identified relationships.

When Science Meets Responsibility: The Major Risks Commission and the L’Aquila Earthquake

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Simoncini
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Seismic Activity ◽  
Research Question ◽  
L’Aquila Earthquake ◽  
Civil Protection ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Main Research

This article aims to analyse the role of law in the identification of the responsibility domain of ‘regulatory science’ (Jasanoff, 1990) within the risk regulatory process. The main research question is therefore,what kindof relationshipbetween science andpolicy-making lawshould design in risk regulation.In order to address this issue, this contribution focuses on the recent verdict of the Tribunal of L’Aquila. After the earthquake occurred in L’Aquila on the 6th April 2009, six Italian scientists that had participated in the Major Risks Commission's meeting have been condemned for the multiple manslaughter of 29 people who were among the 309 victims of the earthquake, ‘for having assessed the risks related to seismic activity in the L’Aquila territory in an inaccurate, generic and ineffective way’ and for having provided ‘information which was imprecise, incomplete and contradictory as to the nature, the causes and the hazardousness and on the future development of the seismic activity’.As far as risk assessment and risk communication are concerned, firstly the tasks of the Major Risks Commission under the Italian Civil Protection law will be analysed. Against this backdrop, the issues related to this expert body's responsibility will be addressed and the gaps in the current accountability regime will be pointed out.

AIDS and subjective risk assessment: A critical review

Health Policy ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernie J. O'Brien
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Subjective Risk

Venous thromboembolic risk and thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical outpatients

Phlebologie ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 35 (06) ◽  
pp. 286-288
Author(s):  
V. Hach-Wunderle ◽  
F. H. Mader ◽  
W. D. Paar ◽  
S. K. Haas
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Medical Illness ◽  
Thromboembolic Risk ◽  
Objective Risk ◽  
Subjective Risk ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic ◽  
Objective Score ◽  
Medical Outpatients

Summary215 German family physicians participated in a prospective registry to assess the venous thromboembolic risk in acutely ill medical outpatients. In 1247 patients who were visited at home due to an acute medical illness, the risk factors were documented using a standardised questionnaire. The doctors subjectively rated the patient’s risk on a scale ranging from 1 to 10 and the result was compared with an objective risk-score which had been previously developed for hospitalized patients and has been successfully used in these patients. The results showed a wide agreement of the subjective risk assessment and the objective score. The resulting consequence of an adequate thromboprophylaxis reflects a high awareness of venous thromboembolic risk among the physicians treating acutely ill medical outpatients.

Glyphosate

2018 ◽  
pp. 234-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Arcuri
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Hazard Analysis ◽  
International Agency ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Authorities ◽  
The World ◽  
Political Choices ◽  
Front Stage ◽  
Stark Contrast

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world. Globally, 6.1 billion kilograms have been applied in the last decade alone. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), classified glyphosate as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’. In stark contrast, regulatory authorities worldwide have attributed non-carcinogenic properties to glyphosate. By charting its recent regulatory history, this chapter demonstrates how glyphosate has been ‘subjected’ to law through a politics of separation. In the hybrid regulatory space where science and law interact, law retains its authority by cutting-off arguments. This politics of separation is expedient, as law ought to resolve conflicts, to decide. However, by cutting-off debate and discourse, political choices are being back-staged. Glyphosate, as an object of law, has catalyzed contestation of existing regulatory categories (eg risk assessment/hazard analysis). In so doing, glyphosate has brought the politics back to the front-stage, triggering a process of re-politicization of transnational risk regulation.

A review of artificial intelligence based risk assessment methods for capturing complexity-risk interdependencies

2019 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Farman Afzal ◽  
Shao Yunfei ◽  
Mubasher Nazir ◽  
Saad Mahmood Bhatti
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Construction Management ◽  
Hybrid Methods ◽  
Hybrid Approach ◽  
Cost Overrun ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Subjective Risk ◽  
Construction Risk ◽  
High Uncertainty

Purpose In the past decades, artificial intelligence (AI)-based hybrid methods have been increasingly applied in construction risk management practices. The purpose of this paper is to review and compile the current AI methods used for cost-risk assessment in the construction management domain in order to capture complexity and risk interdependencies under high uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach This paper makes a content analysis, based on a comprehensive literature review of articles published in high-quality journals from the years 2008 to 2018. Fuzzy hybrid methods, such as fuzzy-analytical network processing, fuzzy-artificial neural network and fuzzy-simulation, have been widely used and dominated in the literature due to their ability to measure the complexity and uncertainty of the system. Findings The findings of this review article suggest that due to the limitation of subjective risk data and complex computation, the applications of these AI methods are limited in order to address cost overrun issues under high uncertainty. It is suggested that a hybrid approach of fuzzy logic and extended form of Bayesian belief network (BBN) can be applied in cost-risk assessment to better capture complexity-risk interdependencies under uncertainty. Research limitations/implications This study only focuses on the subjective risk assessment methods applied in construction management to overcome cost overrun problem. Therefore, future research can be extended to interpret the input data required to deal with uncertainties, rather than relying solely on subjective judgments in risk assessment analysis. Practical implications These results may assist in the management of cost overrun while addressing complexity and uncertainty to avoid chaos in a project. In addition, project managers, experts and practitioners should address the interrelationship between key complexity and risk factors in order to plan risk impact on project cost. The proposed hybrid method of fuzzy logic and BBN can better support the management implications in recent construction risk management practice. Originality/value This study addresses the applications of AI-based methods in complex construction projects. A proposed hybrid approach could better address the complexity-risk interdependencies which increase cost uncertainty in project.

scholarly journals University student’s HIV awareness and subjective risk assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 323-337
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Potemkina ◽  
◽  
Aleksandra Mikhailova ◽  
Daria Vovk ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Subjective Risk ◽  
Hiv Awareness

Science in the Process of Risk Regulation under the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukasz Gruszczynski
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
The Right

This article attempts to present a comprehensive and coherent picture of the position occupied by science under the SPS Agreement and in the SPS case law. It claims that the approach adopted by the Appellate Body reflects the explicit language of the SPS Agreement and is predominantly based on a technical paradigm. In consequence, science plays a critical role in distinguishing between legal and illegal SPS measures.The article argues that such an approach is generally compatible with the text of the SPS Agreement and provides a coherent SPS system. However, it also identifies certain areas, which lack coherence, as certain standards seem to violate the right of the Member States to establish an appropriate level of protection. These are: ascertainability of the risk as a precondition for valid risk assessment; strict specifity of the risk assessment in low-risk situations; the proportionality between the risk identified and the SPS measure; the notion of negligible risks; and the concept of likelihood in the quarantine risk assessments. The article claims that these standards cannot be generally applied in SPS disputes as, in certain situations, they will result in the violation of the right of the Member States to establish an appropriate level of SPS protection. Finally, a number of specific issues, which require resolution, are highlighted, namely the quality of minority scientific opinions, the relationship between the insufficiency of scientific evidence and scientific uncertainty. The article suggests that the ultimate role ascribed to science under the SPS Agreement can be assessed only after an interpretation of those issues is provided by future case law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document