The science of risk assessment: evidence of inevitable epistemological limits
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-7723_28-2_10Keywords:
Risk, risk assessment, epistemology, uncertainties, ethicsAbstract
The author presents an analysis of the epistemological structure associated with risk assessment considered as a fundamental component of risk management, in a broad sense. After justifying the selection of this component from the others that constitute risk and crisis management (restricted sense), some characteristics of the risk and the respective assessment are presented that show specific and inevitable challenges and epistemological limits. The disclosure of these limits and the effects on risk communication and ethics is a positive manifestation of the maturity and consolidation of this area of knowledge and an incentive for future developments.
Downloads
References
Almeida, A. (2011a). Incertezas e Riscos. Conceptualização Operacional, Esfera do Caos, 237p.
Almeida, A. (2011b). Risco e gestão do risco: questões filosóficas subjacentes ao modelo técnico conceptual, Territorium 18, Associação Portuguesa de Riscos, Prevenção e Segurança, 23-31. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14195/1647-7723_18_2
Almeida, A. (2014). Gestão do risco e da incerteza: conceitos e filosofia subjacente. Realidades e Desafios na Gestão dos Riscos, Diálogo entre Ciência e Utilizadores, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 19-29. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14195/978-972-8330-23-1_2
Apostolakis, G. (2003). How Useful is Quantitative Risk Assessment?, M.I.T., Engineering System Division, Working Papers Series (ESD-WP-2003-05), 17 p.
Aven,T. (2016). Risk assessment and risk management: review of recent advances on their foundation, European Journal of Operational Research, 253, Elsevier, 1-13.
Aven, T. (2019). The cautionary principle in risk management: Foundation and practical use, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 191, 6 p.
Aven, T. (2020). Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art? Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 193, 8 p.
Aven, T., Renn, O. e Rosa, E. A. (2011). On the ontological status of the concept of risk. Safety Science, 49 (8-9), 1074-1079. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.04.015
Aziz, S. e Dowling, M. (2018). AI and machine learning for risk management, SRN Electronic Journal, January, 18 p., URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3201337
Bernstein, P. L. (1998). Against the Gods. The Remarkable Story of Risk, J. Wiley, New York, 383 p.
Brannmark, J. e Sahlin, N. (2010). Ethical Theory and the Philosophy of Risk: First Thought, Journal of Risk Research, 13, 149-161.
Brito, M. (2012). Direito Administrativo, Perigo, Risco e Princípio Democrático. Direitos das Catástrofes Naturais, Carla Amado Gomes (ed.), Capítulo VII, Almedina, 323-354.
Brown, H. e Goble, R. (1990). The Role of Scientists in Risk Assessment. RISK: Issues in Health and Safety, Vol. 1, n.º 4, 283-311.
Coolen, F. P. A., Troffaes, M. C. M. e Augustin, T. (2010). Imprecise Probability, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science, Springer, 5 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2_296
Dutant, J. e Engel, P., eds, (2017). Philosophie de la Connaissance, Croyance, Connaissance, Justification, VRIN, Textes clés de philosophie de la connaissance, 448 p.
Eldevik, S., Hafver, A., Jakopanec, I. e Pedersen, F. B. (2017). Risk, Uncertainty, and “What if” - a practical view on uncertainty and risk in the knowledge - and physical domain, ESREL Conference Paper. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315210469-149
Fischhoff, B. (2015). The Realities of risk-cost-benefit analysis, Science 350 (6260), 8 p.
Flage, R. e Aven, T. (2015). Emerging risk – Conceptual definition and a relation to black swan type of events. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 144, 61-67.
Goerlandt, F., Khakzad, N. e Reniers, G. (2017). Validity and Validation of Safety-Related Quantitative Risk Analysis. Safety Science, 99, Part B, Elsevier, 127-139.
Hansson, S. (2004). Philosophical Perspectives on Risk, Techné 8:1,10-35.
Hansson, S. (2005). Seven Mythes of Risk. Risk Management: An International Journal, 7 (2), 7-17.
ISO - International Organization for Standardization (2009). Risk Management - Principles and Guidelines, ISO/TC 262 Risk Management, 24 p.
Kaplan, S. e Garrick, B. (1981). On The Quantitative Definition of Risk, Risk Analysis, Vol.1, n.º 1, p 11-27.
Knight, F. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Boston, Cambridge, Houghton Mifflin, 387 p.
Lane, D. e Maxfield, R. (2004). Ontological Uncertainty and Innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, January, 48 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-004-0227-7
Leher, K. (1986). The coherence theory of knowledge, Philosophical Topics, 14, 5-25 (e em Dutant e Engel (2017), 111-141).
Lourenço, L. e Almeida, A. (2018). Alguns Conceitos à Luz da Teoria do Risco, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. Riscos e Crises. Da teoria à plena manifestação, Série “Riscos e Catástrofes”, Vol. 6, 18-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14195/978-989-26-1697-1_1
Ludwig, C. (2019). Para uma concepção epistemológica da incerteza. Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR, Curitiba, Brasil, Vol. 64, n.º 1, 97-117. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/rfdufpr.v64i1.62405
McCarthy, D. (1997). Rights, Explanation, and Risks, Ethics, The University of Chicago Press, Vol. 107, n.º 2, 205-225.
Njå, O., Solberg, Ø. e Braut, G. S. ( (2017). Uncertainty - Its Ontological Status and Relation to Safety, “The Illusion of Control” (cap. 2), Safety Management, G. Motet e c. Bieder (eds.), 5-21.
NRC - NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (1983). Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, Ruckelshaus, Risk, Science and Democracy, Vol I, Issues in Science and Technology, 19 (1985).
Paltrinieri, N., Comfort, L. e Reniers, G. (2019). Learning about risk: machine learning for risk assessment. Safety Science,118, 475-486.
Popper, K. (1992). Un Univers de Propensions. Deux études sur la causalité et l´évolution. Editions de L´Éclat, Collection tiré à part (Sciences Humaines et Sociales), 80 p.
Rice, C. e Dunbar,W. (2016). A framework for adaptive risk management in the planning, design, and construction of mining projects, Proceedings of Risk and Resilience Mining Solutions Conference, Vancouver, Canada, InfoMine, 213-230, ISBN: 978-1-988185-00-2.
Sackris, D. e Beebe, J. (2013). Is Justification Necessary for Knowledge?, Advances in Experimental Epistemology, 175-192.
Seiler, F. e Alvarez, J. (1994). The Scientific Method in Risk Assessment. Technology: Journal of The Franklin Institute, Vol. 331 A, 53-58.
Shrader-Frechette, K. (1991). Risk and Rationality: Philosophical Foundations for Populists Reforms, Los Angeles, University of California, 84 p.
SRA (2015). Society for Risk Analysis Glossary, 9 p., URL: https://www.sra.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SRA-Glossary-FINAL.pdf
Slovic, P. (2000). The Perception of Risk, London, Earthscan, 473 p.
Tannert, C., Elvers, H. D. e Jandrig, B. (2007). The ethics of uncertainty. In the light of possible dangers, research becomes a moral duty, EMBO reports, Vol.8, n.º 10, 892-896.
Turner, S. (2003). Liberal Democracy 3.0 Civil Society in an Age of Experts, Sage Publications, 154 p.
USNRC - UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (1975). WASH-1400 – Reactor Safety Study, NUREG-75/014 (Rasmussen Report), Washington, USA, 198 p.
USNRC - UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (1978). Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regularity Commssion, USNRC Ad-hoc Review Group, NUREG/CR-0400, Washington, USA, 66 p.
Vasconcelos, V. D., Soares, W. A. e Costa, A. C. L. D. (2015). FN-CURVES: preliminar estimation of severe accident risks after Fukushima, 2015 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference - INAC 2015 São Paulo, SP, Brazil, October 4-9, 2015 Associação Brasileira de Energia Nuclear - ABEN (ISBN: 978-85-99141-06-9).
Walley, P. (2000). Towards a unified theory of imprecise probability. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 24, 125-148.
Wenning, C. (2009). Scientific epistemology: How scientists know what they know, J. Phys. Tchr. Educ. Online, 5(2), Illinois State University Physics Dept., 3-15.
Welch, J. (2017). Coping with Ethical Uncertainty. Diametros, A Journal of Philosophy, 53 (2017), 150–166. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13153/diam.53.0.1105
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Territorium
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows sharing the work with recognition of authorship and initial publication in Antropologia Portuguesa journal.
