IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijbcrm/v1y2009i1p67-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new scientific framework for quantitative risk assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Terje Aven

Abstract

Many analysts consider Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) to be an application of statistics and founded on the natural science paradigm. However, if the goal is the accurate estimation of some true underlying risk parameters, QRA fails as a scientific method. The alternative is to consider QRA to be a method for describing uncertainties. The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss a new scientific framework founded on such a perspective. The framework is based on knowledge-based (subjective) probabilities to express uncertainties about unknown quantities, as well as on the qualitative assessment of uncertainties extending beyond the probabilistic analysis. Risk is viewed as the combination of events/consequences and associated uncertainties. Critical methodological issues, such as model uncertainty, are clarified. Several examples are included to motivate and explain the basic ideas of the framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Terje Aven, 2009. "A new scientific framework for quantitative risk assessments," International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 67-77.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijbcrm:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:67-77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=28951
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    3. Holmes E. Miller & Kurt J. Engemann, 2014. "Using reliability and simulation models in business continuity planning," International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1), pages 43-56.

    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:ids:ijbcrm:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:67-77. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=333 .

    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.