IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v36y2016i11p2039-2046.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Radiological Risk Assessment by Convergence Methodology Model in RDD Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Fagner C. Rother
  • Wilson F. Rebello
  • Matthew J. F. Healy
  • Mauricio M. Silva
  • Paulo A. M. Cabral
  • Hélio C. Vital
  • Edson R. Andrade

Abstract

A radiological dispersal device (RDD) is a simple weapon capable of causing human harm, environmental contamination, disruption, area denial, and economic cost. It can affect small, large, or long areas depending on atmospheric stability. The risk of developing a radio‐induced cancer depends on exposure, and an effective response depends upon available timely guidance. This article proposes and demonstrates a convergence of three different capabilities to assess risk and support rapid safe resource efficient response. The three capabilities that are integrated are Hotspot for dispersion, RERF for epidemiological risk, and RESRAD‐RDD for response guidance. The combined methodology supports decisions on risk reduction and resource allocation through work schedules, the designation and composition of response teams, and siting for operations. In the illustrative RDD scenario, the contamination area for sheltering, evacuation, and long‐term public concern was greatest for calm atmospheric conditions, whilst close‐quarter responders faced highest dose rates for neutral atmospheric conditions. Generally, the risks to women responders were found to be significantly greater than for men, and the risks to 20‐year‐old responders were three times that of their 60‐year‐old counterparts for similar exposure.

Suggested Citation

  • Fagner C. Rother & Wilson F. Rebello & Matthew J. F. Healy & Mauricio M. Silva & Paulo A. M. Cabral & Hélio C. Vital & Edson R. Andrade, 2016. "Radiological Risk Assessment by Convergence Methodology Model in RDD Scenarios," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(11), pages 2039-2046, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:11:p:2039-2046
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12557
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12557?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew J. Dombroski & Paul S. Fischbeck, 2006. "An Integrated Physical Dispersion and Behavioral Response Model for Risk Assessment of Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 501-514, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lawrence M. Wein & Youngsoo Choi & Sylvie Denuit, 2010. "Analyzing Evacuation Versus Shelter‐in‐Place Strategies After a Terrorist Nuclear Detonation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1315-1327, September.
    2. Alessandro Tofani & Massimiliano Bartolozzi, 2008. "Ranking Nuclear and Radiological Terrorism Scenarios: The Italian Case," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1431-1444, October.
    3. Matt Dombroski & Baruch Fischhoff & Paul Fischbeck, 2006. "Predicting Emergency Evacuation and Sheltering Behavior: A Structured Analytical Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1675-1688, December.
    4. Michelle Sydes & Lorelei Hine & Angela Higginson & James McEwan & Laura Dugan & Lorraine Mazerolle, 2023. "Criminal justice interventions for preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism: An evidence and gap map," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:11:p:2039-2046. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.