A multi-perspective process safety risk assessment with hybrid risks.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-18 DOI:10.1111/risa.70028
Tahere Vafaee, M A S Monfared
{"title":"A multi-perspective process safety risk assessment with hybrid risks.","authors":"Tahere Vafaee, M A S Monfared","doi":"10.1111/risa.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, we assert that the process safety risks vary based on the identity of the stakeholders involved, for example, employees, management, regulators, community members, insurance companies, and environment. These risks differ in perceptions, magnitudes, and ramifications across an array of stakeholders. Hence, the process safety risk assessment taken from a single perspective, as is often the case, is inadequate and perhaps misleading. Instead, a more realistic approach is a multi-perspective risk assessment by considering the interactions existing among different perspectives and by building concurrent and compatible models explicitly. This marks the first innovation of the current research work. The second innovation centers on the hybrid nature of risk analysis. We recognize the distinction between safety risks impacting human well-being and risks affecting facilities, properties, capital assets, and the environment. The research introduces a hybrid safety-facility risk assessment to address different types of risks. Still, developing multiple models to represent hybrid risks from different perspectives is complex, time-consuming, tedious, and very costly. In addition, results from multiple models may become incompatible, confusing the stakeholders. To avoid such difficulties, a comprehensive model is developed initially, which, while impractical itself, allows for the extraction of practical perspective-based models through reduction. The methodology was illustrated and validated by examining a city gas pressure reduction station from 12 different perspectives, illustrating different risk results and highlighting the necessity of a multi-perspective and hybrid risk approach for accurate process safety risk analysis. However, the methodology is widely applicable across different risk assessment areas, not limited to the process safety of a city gate station (CGS). Furthermore, the twelve perspectives considered are specific to the context of the CGS case in a suburb of Tehran and may vary in other situations. By incorporating these practices, organizations can ensure a more comprehensive, inclusive, and accurate assessment of process safety risks, ultimately leading to better risk management and decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"2521-2547"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70028","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, we assert that the process safety risks vary based on the identity of the stakeholders involved, for example, employees, management, regulators, community members, insurance companies, and environment. These risks differ in perceptions, magnitudes, and ramifications across an array of stakeholders. Hence, the process safety risk assessment taken from a single perspective, as is often the case, is inadequate and perhaps misleading. Instead, a more realistic approach is a multi-perspective risk assessment by considering the interactions existing among different perspectives and by building concurrent and compatible models explicitly. This marks the first innovation of the current research work. The second innovation centers on the hybrid nature of risk analysis. We recognize the distinction between safety risks impacting human well-being and risks affecting facilities, properties, capital assets, and the environment. The research introduces a hybrid safety-facility risk assessment to address different types of risks. Still, developing multiple models to represent hybrid risks from different perspectives is complex, time-consuming, tedious, and very costly. In addition, results from multiple models may become incompatible, confusing the stakeholders. To avoid such difficulties, a comprehensive model is developed initially, which, while impractical itself, allows for the extraction of practical perspective-based models through reduction. The methodology was illustrated and validated by examining a city gas pressure reduction station from 12 different perspectives, illustrating different risk results and highlighting the necessity of a multi-perspective and hybrid risk approach for accurate process safety risk analysis. However, the methodology is widely applicable across different risk assessment areas, not limited to the process safety of a city gate station (CGS). Furthermore, the twelve perspectives considered are specific to the context of the CGS case in a suburb of Tehran and may vary in other situations. By incorporating these practices, organizations can ensure a more comprehensive, inclusive, and accurate assessment of process safety risks, ultimately leading to better risk management and decision-making.

混合风险的多视角工艺安全风险评估。
在本文中,我们断言过程安全风险根据所涉及的利益相关者的身份而变化,例如,员工,管理层,监管机构,社区成员,保险公司和环境。这些风险在一系列利益相关者的认知、程度和后果方面存在差异。因此,通常情况下,从单一角度进行的工艺安全风险评估是不充分的,可能会产生误导。相反,更现实的方法是通过考虑不同透视图之间存在的交互以及通过显式地构建并发和兼容模型来进行多角度风险评估。这标志着当前研究工作的第一个创新。第二个创新集中在风险分析的混合性质上。我们认识到影响人类福祉的安全风险与影响设施、财产、资本资产和环境的安全风险之间的区别。该研究引入了一种混合安全设施风险评估来解决不同类型的风险。然而,从不同的角度开发多个模型来表示混合风险是复杂的、耗时的、乏味的,而且成本非常高。此外,来自多个模型的结果可能变得不兼容,从而使涉众感到困惑。为了避免这些困难,最初开发了一个综合模型,该模型虽然本身不切实际,但允许通过简化提取实用的基于视角的模型。通过从12个不同角度对一个城市燃气减压站进行检查,说明了不同的风险结果,并强调了多视角和混合风险方法对准确过程安全风险分析的必要性。然而,该方法广泛适用于不同的风险评估领域,而不仅仅局限于城门站的过程安全。此外,所考虑的12种观点是特定于德黑兰郊区CGS案例的背景,可能在其他情况下有所不同。通过合并这些实践,组织可以确保对过程安全风险进行更全面、更包容和更准确的评估,最终导致更好的风险管理和决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信