scholarly journals An economic model of risk assessment for water projects

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 2054-2068
Author(s):  
Antonio Nesticò ◽  
Gianluigi De Mare ◽  
Gabriella Maselli

Abstract The projects that concern water resources are characterized by the multiple risk rates – even extra–financial – that significantly affect their concrete feasibility. Although the risk assessment is decisive for expressing economic convenience judgements on these project initiatives, the decision-maker does not have precise references to determine whether the residual investment risk is acceptable. Thus, the purpose of the paper is to overcome the limit set by characterizing a model for the acceptability of project risk, also considering the plurality of environmental effects that the water projects generate on the community. The idea is to integrate the logic ‘As Low As Reasonably Practicable’ (ALARP) into the procedural schemes of Cost–Benefit Analysis (CBA). In accordance with this principle, widely applied in high-risk sectors such as those of industrial engineering, a risk is ALARP when the costs to further reduce it are disproportionate to the obtainable benefits. The application of the model to an irrigation reconversion intervention in a Municipality in the Province of Salerno (Italy) shows that the ALARP logic defines a general way of thinking and can contribute to the definition of effective forecasting protocols. In this sense, the proposed methodology becomes a useful support for environmental decision-making. (The paper is to be attributed in equal parts to the three authors.)

1998 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 330-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Thompson ◽  
Steve Rayner ◽  
Steven Ney

OUR CONCLUSION, IN PART I,* WAS THAT THE ABANDONMENT OF THE expert/lay dichotomy as the basis for understanding risk perception, whilst essential, is not going to be easy. We argued that:1) Objectivism (the idea that we can clearly distinguish between what the risks really are and what people variously and erroneously believe them to be) has to give way to constructivism (the idea that risk is inherently subjective: something that we project onto whatever it is that is ‘out there’).2) To impose a single definition of what the problem is, which is what so much of policy analysis and science-for-public-policy does, is to exclude all those who happen not to share that particular way of framing things. Since people are unlikely to support a policy that is aimed at solving what they do not see to be the problem, approaches that insist on singularity (and on single metrics — cost: benefit analysis, for instance, probabilistic risk assessment, qualityadjusted life years and so on) will inevitably be low on consent, surprise-prone, unref lexive, brittle and undemocratic.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Nesticò ◽  
Shuquan He ◽  
Gianluigi De Mare ◽  
Renato Benintendi ◽  
Gabriella Maselli

The process of allocating financial resources is extremely complex—both because the selection of investments depends on multiple, and interrelated, variables, and constraints that limit the eligibility domain of the solutions, and because the feasibility of projects is influenced by risk factors. In this sense, it is essential to develop economic evaluations on a probabilistic basis. Nevertheless, for the civil engineering sector, the literature emphasizes the centrality of risk management, in order to establish interventions for risk mitigation. On the other hand, few methodologies are available to systematically compare ante and post mitigation design risk, along with the verification of the economic convenience of these actions. The aim of the paper is to demonstrate how these limits can be at least partially overcome by integrating, in the traditional Cost-Benefit Analysis schemes, the As Low as Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) logic. According to it, the risk is tolerable only if it is impossible to reduce it further or if the costs to mitigate it are disproportionate to the benefits obtainable. The research outlines the phases of an innovative protocol for managing investment risks. On the basis of a case study dealing with a project for the recovery and transformation of an ancient medieval village into a widespread-hotel, the novelty of the model consists of the characterization of acceptability and tolerability thresholds of the investment risk, as well as its ability to guarantee the triangular balance between risks, costs and benefits deriving from mitigation options.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Shinoda ◽  
Koji Uru

In this study, a risk assessment model for ship collisions is proposed according to the guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) approved by IMO in 2002. The analysis is applied to ship collisions between fishing and cargo vessels owing to their high frequency and enormous damage. Bayesian network theory for risk analysis has been applied to reveal a causal relationship on human factors. A trial evaluation of Risk Control Options (RCOs) for collisions is attempted through the calculation of the dominance index. Finally, a trial cost benefit analysis for RCOs is considered through Gross Cost of Averting Fatality (GCAF) in FSA.


The Lancet ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 396 (10247) ◽  
pp. 311-312
Author(s):  
Rajiv Agarwal ◽  
Patrick Rossignol ◽  
William B White ◽  
Bryan Williams

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document