IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v145y2016icp215-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ignoring scenarios in risk assessments: Understanding the issue and improving current practice

Author

Listed:
  • Aven, Terje

Abstract

In risk assessment we are typically faced with a huge number of potential scenarios and events, and in practise some of these are ignored, either because they are not identified or because of judged low probability. However, a scenario or an event may occur despite being extremely unlikely. Considering a large population of such scenarios and events, the occurrence probability is not necessarily negligible. In this paper we take a closer look at this challenge, the main aim being to clarify the issue and provide some recommendation on how to best handle it in practise. A main conclusion is that the risk assessment should be placed in a sufficiently broad framework, ensuring that the outcome and main event spaces are complete, and sufficient focus is placed on the hypotheses and assumptions supporting the detailed scenarios that are identified.

Suggested Citation

  • Aven, Terje, 2016. "Ignoring scenarios in risk assessments: Understanding the issue and improving current practice," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 215-220.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:145:y:2016:i:c:p:215-220
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2015.08.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832015002549
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2015.08.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Itf, 2009. "Security,Risk Perception and Cost-Benefit Analysis," OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers 2009/6, OECD Publishing.
    2. Aven, Terje, 2011. "Selective critique of risk assessments with recommendations for improving methodology and practise," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 509-514.
    3. Metzger, Michael B., 2010. "Problems with probabilities," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 15-19, January.
    4. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    5. Bo Bergman, 2009. "Conceptualistic Pragmatism: A framework for Bayesian analysis?," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 86-93.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Turati, Pietro & Pedroni, Nicola & Zio, Enrico, 2017. "Simulation-based exploration of high-dimensional system models for identifying unexpected events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 317-330.
    2. Sperstad, Iver Bakken & Kjølle, Gerd H. & Gjerde, Oddbjørn, 2020. "A comprehensive framework for vulnerability analysis of extraordinary events in power systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Wang, Wei & Cammi, Antonio & Di Maio, Francesco & Lorenzi, Stefano & Zio, Enrico, 2018. "A Monte Carlo-based exploration framework for identifying components vulnerable to cyber threats in nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 24-37.
    4. Nikolaos P Ventikos & Konstantinos Louzis, 2023. "Developing next generation marine risk analysis for ships: Bio-inspiration for building immunity," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 405-424, April.
    5. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    6. Aven, Terje, 2017. "How some types of risk assessments can support resilience analysis and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 536-543.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    2. Aven, Terje, 2012. "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 33-44.
    3. Winter, Peter, 2007. "Managerial Risk Accounting and Control – A German perspective," MPRA Paper 8185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Li, Xu & Vermeulen, Freek, 2021. "High risk, low return (and vice versa): the effect of product innovation on firm performance in a transition economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Narduzzo, Alessandro & Warglien, Massimo, 1996. "Learning from the Experience of Others: An Experiment on Information Contagion," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(1), pages 113-126.
    6. Nabiha Nefzi, 2018. "Fear Of Failure And Entrepreneurial Risk Perception," International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, Center for International Scientific Research of VSO and VSPP, vol. 6(2), pages 45-58, December.
    7. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    8. Schweizer, Lars & Patzelt, Holger, 2012. "Employee commitment in the post-acquisition integration process: The effect of integration speed and leadership," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 298-310.
    9. Patzelt, Holger & zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, Dodo & Fischer, Heiko T., 2009. "Upper echelons and portfolio strategies of venture capital firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 558-572, November.
    10. T. K. Das & Bing-Sheng Teng, 1998. "Time and Entrepreneurial Risk Behavior," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(2), pages 69-88, January.
    11. Anthony Goerzen & Stephen Sapp & Andrew Delios, 2010. "Investor Response to Environmental Risk in Foreign Direct Investment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 683-708, December.
    12. G. Rejikumar & Aswathy Asokan-Ajitha & Sofi Dinesh & Ajay Jose, 2022. "The role of cognitive complexity and risk aversion in online herd behavior," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 585-621, June.
    13. Delis, Manthos D. & Hasan, Iftekhar & Tsionas, Efthymios G., 2015. "Firms' risk endogenous to strategic management choices," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 16/2015, Bank of Finland.
    14. Udo Milkau, 2017. "Risk Culture during the Last 2000 Years—From an Aleatory Society to the Illusion of Risk Control," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Philip Bromiley, 2009. "A Prospect Theory Model of Resource Allocation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 124-138, September.
    16. Alserda, Gosse A.G. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Swinkels, Laurens & van der Lecq, Fieke S.G., 2019. "Individual pension risk preference elicitation and collective asset allocation with heterogeneity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 206-225.
    17. Malmendier, Ulrike & Tate, Geoffrey, 2008. "Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market's reaction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 20-43, July.
    18. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    19. Elisabetta Mafrolla & Felice Matozza, 2014. "Risk management and firm size: a survey of Italian private companies," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(3), pages 87-108.
    20. Michel Benaroch, 2018. "Real Options Models for Proactive Uncertainty-Reducing Mitigations and Applications in Cybersecurity Investment Decision Making," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 315-340, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:145:y:2016:i:c:p:215-220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.