IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i21p5579-d434719.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Parameterization, Analysis, and Risk Management in a Comprehensive Management System with Emphasis on Energy and Performance (ISO 50001: 2018)

Author

Listed:
  • P. Pablo Poveda-Orjuela

    (ASTEQ Technology, 53 Street No. 53-15, Barranquilla 080020, Colombia)

  • J. Carlos García-Díaz

    (Centre for Quality and Change Management, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera, s/n. 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Alexander Pulido-Rojano

    (Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad Simón Bolívar, Av. 59 No. 59-92, Barranquilla 080020, Colombia)

  • Germán Cañón-Zabala

    (QUARA Group, 157 Street No. 13 B-20, Bogotá 110121, Colombia)

Abstract

The future of business development relies on the effective management of risks, opportunities, and energy and water resources. Here, we evaluate the application of best practices to identify, analyze, address, monitor, and control risks and opportunities (R/O) according to ISO 31000 and 50000. Furthermore, we shed light on tools, templates, ISO guides, and international documents that contribute to classifying, identifying, formulating control, and managing R/O parameterization in a comprehensive management system model, namely CMS QHSE3+, which consists of quality (Q), health and safety (HS), environmental management (E), energy efficiency (E2), and other risk components (+) that include comprehensive biosecurity and biosafety. By focusing on the deployment of R/O-based thinking (ROBT) at strategic and operational levels, we show vulnerability reduction in CMS QHSE3+ by managing energy, efficiency, and sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Pablo Poveda-Orjuela & J. Carlos García-Díaz & Alexander Pulido-Rojano & Germán Cañón-Zabala, 2020. "Parameterization, Analysis, and Risk Management in a Comprehensive Management System with Emphasis on Energy and Performance (ISO 50001: 2018)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-43, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5579-:d:434719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5579/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5579/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Florio, Cristina & Leoni, Giulia, 2017. "Enterprise risk management and firm performance: The Italian case," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 56-74.
    2. Rafael Uriarte-Romero & Margarita Gil-Samaniego & Edgar Valenzuela-Mondaca & Juan Ceballos-Corral, 2017. "Methodology for the Successful Integration of an Energy Management System to an Operational Environmental System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-9, July.
    3. Thekdi, Shital & Aven, Terje, 2016. "An enhanced data-analytic framework for integrating risk management and performance management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 277-287.
    4. Parrish, Bradley D., 2010. "Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: Principles of organization design," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 510-523, September.
    5. Oliva, Fábio Lotti, 2016. "A maturity model for enterprise risk management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 66-79.
    6. P. Pablo Poveda-Orjuela & J. Carlos García-Díaz & Alexander Pulido-Rojano & Germán Cañón-Zabala, 2019. "ISO 50001: 2018 and Its Application in a Comprehensive Management System with an Energy-Performance Focus," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-33, December.
    7. Aven, Terje & Zio, Enrico, 2011. "Some considerations on the treatment of uncertainties in risk assessment for practical decision making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 64-74.
    8. Aven, Terje & Krohn, Bodil S., 2014. "A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    10. Aven, Terje, 2012. "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 33-44.
    11. Terje Aven & Enrico Zio, 2014. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1164-1172, July.
    12. Aven, Terje & Ylönen, Marja, 2018. "A risk interpretation of sociotechnical safety perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 13-18.
    13. İdil Kaya, 2018. "Perspectives on Internal Control and Enterprise Risk Management," Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, in: Mehmet Huseyin Bilgin & Hakan Danis & Ender Demir & Ugur Can (ed.), Eurasian Business Perspectives, pages 379-389, Springer.
    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. Luis Angel Iturralde Carrera & Andrés Lorenzo Álvarez González & Juvenal Rodríguez-Reséndiz & José Manuel Álvarez-Alvarado, 2023. "Selection of the Energy Performance Indicator for Hotels Based on ISO 50001: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-19, January.

    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. P. Pablo Poveda-Orjuela & J. Carlos García-Díaz & Alexander Pulido-Rojano & Germán Cañón-Zabala, 2019. "ISO 50001: 2018 and Its Application in a Comprehensive Management System with an Energy-Performance Focus," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-33, December.
    2. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    3. Nguyen, Son & Chen, Peggy Shu-Ling & Du, Yuquan & Thai, Vinh V., 2021. "An Operational Risk Analysis Model for Container Shipping Systems considering Uncertainty Quantification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    4. Nguyen, Son & Chen, Peggy Shu-Ling & Du, Yuquan & Shi, Wenming, 2019. "A quantitative risk analysis model with integrated deliberative Delphi platform for container shipping operational risks," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 203-227.
    5. Yuan Yang, 2019. "Reforming Health, Safety, and Environmental Regulation for Offshore Operations in China: Risk and Resilience Approaches?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    6. Mohammad Yazdi, 2019. "A review paper to examine the validity of Bayesian network to build rational consensus in subjective probabilistic failure analysis," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Merkourios Papanikolaou & Yiannis Xenidis, 2020. "Risk-Informed Performance Assessment of Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Charles Sabel & Gary Herrigel & Peer Hull Kristensen, 2018. "Regulation under uncertainty: The coevolution of industry and regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 371-394, September.
    9. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    10. Jonek-Kowalska, Izabela & Nawrocki, Tomasz L., 2019. "Holistic fuzzy evaluation of operational risk in polish mining enterprises in a long-term and sectoral research perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Don Pagach & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2020. "The Challenges and Opportunities for ERM Post-COVID-19: Agendas for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    13. Aven, Terje & Krohn, Bodil S., 2014. "A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.
    15. Goerlandt, Floris & Montewka, Jakub, 2015. "Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 115-134.
    16. Blancke, Olivier & Tahan, Antoine & Komljenovic, Dragan & Amyot, Normand & Lévesque, Mélanie & Hudon, Claude, 2018. "A holistic multi-failure mode prognosis approach for complex equipment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 136-151.
    17. Ivana Dvorski Lacković & Nataša Kurnoga & Danijela Miloš Sprčić, 2022. "Three-factor model of Enterprise Risk Management implementation: exploratory study of non-financial companies," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(2), pages 101-122, June.
    18. Sujan, Mark A. & Habli, Ibrahim & Kelly, Tim P. & Gühnemann, Astrid & Pozzi, Simone & Johnson, Christopher W., 2017. "How can health care organisations make and justify decisions about risk reduction? Lessons from a cross-industry review and a health care stakeholder consensus development process," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1-11.
    19. Veland, H. & Aven, T., 2013. "Risk communication in the light of different risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 34-40.
    20. Gerassis, S. & Albuquerque, M.T.D. & García, J.F. & Boente, C. & Giráldez, E. & Taboada, J. & Martín, J.E., 2019. "Understanding complex blasting operations: A structural equation model combining Bayesian networks and latent class clustering," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 195-204.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5579-:d:434719. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.