Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis最新文献_第3页

Risk Attenuation and Amplification in the U.S. Opioid Crisis. 美国阿片类药物危机中的风险衰减和放大。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-23 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13840

Robin Cantor, Heather Bates, Claire MacKoul

{"title":"Risk Attenuation and Amplification in the U.S. Opioid Crisis.","authors":"Robin Cantor, Heather Bates, Claire MacKoul","doi":"10.1111/risa.13840","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13840","url":null,"abstract":"The evolution of risk identification and ultimately the public and private responses that have become known collectively as the \"opioid crisis\" is an important case study in risk management due to the reach and magnitude of its impacts. This article examines a number of \"signals\" related to opioid risks using the social amplification of risk framework (SARF) to investigate a limited set of public-sector activities and policy responses. We evaluate whether the SARF presents an effective lens to examine the serious shortcomings of risk management of opioid use, which has a history of risk attenuation and, more recently, evidence of risk amplification. Our goal in this article is limited to addressing \"goodness of fit\" of the SARF as a descriptive tool. We consider whether the SARF effectively reveals important gaps in public risk management responses for the opioid example and other similarly situated societal risk problems. Applying SARF supports that its suggested relationship between risk signals and inappropriate attenuated public response does generate useful insights into regulatory efficacy for examples of public risk management. Similar such conclusions about inappropriate public responses stemming from the amplification factors are less supported because, in this case, the risk is, and continues to be, large. Overall, we find that the SARF's particular focus on the signaling function of risk information performs best as an organizational aid to study historical information rather than as a predictive tool for determining inappropriate risk management responses.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1393-1408"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/43/ba/RISA-42-1393.PMC9542889.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39549055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Spatial Risk Factors for Pillar 1 COVID-19 Excess Cases and Mortality in Rural Eastern England, UK. 英国英格兰东部农村地区第1支柱COVID-19超额病例和死亡率的空间风险因素

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-02 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13835

Julii Brainard, Steve Rushton, Tim Winters, Paul R Hunter

{"title":"Spatial Risk Factors for Pillar 1 COVID-19 Excess Cases and Mortality in Rural Eastern England, UK.","authors":"Julii Brainard, Steve Rushton, Tim Winters, Paul R Hunter","doi":"10.1111/risa.13835","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13835","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding is still developing about spatial risk factors for COVID-19 infection or mortality. This is a secondary analysis of patient records in a confined area of eastern England, covering persons who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 through end May 2020, including dates of death and residence area. We obtained residence area data on air quality, deprivation levels, care home bed capacity, age distribution, rurality, access to employment centers, and population density. We considered these covariates as risk factors for excess cases and excess deaths in the 28 days after confirmation of positive Covid status relative to the overall case load and death recorded for the study area as a whole. We used the conditional autoregressive Besag-York-Mollie model to investigate the spatial dependency of cases and deaths allowing for a Poisson error structure. Structural equation models were applied to clarify relationships between predictors and outcomes. Excess case counts or excess deaths were both predicted by the percentage of population age 65 years, care home bed capacity and less rurality: older population and more urban areas saw excess cases. Greater deprivation did not correlate with excess case counts but was significantly linked to higher mortality rates after infection. Neither excess cases nor excess deaths were predicted by population density, travel time to local employment centers, or air quality indicators. Only 66% of mortality was explained by locally high case counts. Higher deprivation clearly linked to higher COVID-19 mortality separate from wider community prevalence and other spatial risk factors.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1571-1584"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8661982/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39480088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

The Social Amplification of Risk Framework: A Normative Perspective on Trust? 风险框架的社会放大:信任的规范视角?

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-16 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13757

Angela Bearth, Michael Siegrist

引用次数: 12

Modeling Epistemic Uncertainty in Offshore Wind Farm Production Capacity to Reduce Risk. 海上风电场产能认知不确定性建模以降低风险。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-27 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13846

Athena Zitrou, Tim Bedford, Lesley Walls

{"title":"Modeling Epistemic Uncertainty in Offshore Wind Farm Production Capacity to Reduce Risk.","authors":"Athena Zitrou, Tim Bedford, Lesley Walls","doi":"10.1111/risa.13846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13846","url":null,"abstract":"Financial stakeholders in offshore wind farm projects require predictions of energy production capacity to better manage the risk associated with investment decisions prior to construction. Predictions for early operating life are particularly important due to the dual effects of cash flow discounting and the anticipated performance growth due to experiential learning. We develop a general marked point process model for the times to failure and restoration events of farm subassemblies to capture key uncertainties affecting performance. Sources of epistemic uncertainty are identified in design and manufacturing effectiveness. The model then captures the temporal effects of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties across subassemblies to predict the farm availability-informed relative capacity (maximum generating capacity given the technical state of the equipment). This performance measure enables technical performance uncertainties to be linked to the cost of energy generation. The general modeling approach is contextualized and illustrated for a prospective offshore wind farm. The production capacity uncertainties can be decomposed to assess the contribution of epistemic uncertainty allowing the value of gathering information to reduce risk to be examined.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1524-1540"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39671678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Social Perception of Systemic Risks. 系统性风险的社会认知。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-02 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13831

Pia-Johanna Schweizer, Robert Goble, Ortwin Renn

{"title":"Social Perception of Systemic Risks.","authors":"Pia-Johanna Schweizer, Robert Goble, Ortwin Renn","doi":"10.1111/risa.13831","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13831","url":null,"abstract":"The article distinguishes between two types of risks: conventional and systemic risks. Conventional risks can be contained in space and time, follow linear cause-effect relationships and can be addressed with effective and pointed interventions into the cause-effect chain. Systemic risks, however, are characterized by high complexity, transboundary effects, stochastic relationships, nonlinear cause-effect patterns with tipping points, and are often associated with less public attention than they require. The article addresses the reasons why systemic risks seem to be attenuated in public perception. The article goes on to consider how the social amplification of risk framework is useful in the context of systemic risks and describes needed extensions of that framework. It identifies practical tools for assessing the significance of perceptions for systemic risk situations. Finally, it argues that a graphic representation and simulation of evolving systemic risks and potential countermeasures as well as a participatory deliberative approach of inclusive risk governance are suitable governance strategies for preventing, mitigating, or managing systemic risks.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1455-1471"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39480491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 11

Knowledge, Social Influences, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Cultural Values Explain the Public's Decisions Related to Prudent Antibiotic Use. 知识、社会影响、感知风险和利益以及文化价值观解释了公众对谨慎使用抗生素的决定。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-16 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13851

Vivianne H M Visschers, Vanessa Feck, Anne Herrmann

{"title":"Knowledge, Social Influences, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Cultural Values Explain the Public's Decisions Related to Prudent Antibiotic Use.","authors":"Vivianne H M Visschers, Vanessa Feck, Anne Herrmann","doi":"10.1111/risa.13851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13851","url":null,"abstract":"People should use antibiotics (AB) prudently to mitigate antibiotic resistance (ABR). Previous studies-and, subsequently, interventions-on ABR have focused mainly on improving public awareness and knowledge. We investigated a comprehensive theory-based explanatory model to understand the public's decision making regarding prudent AB use, based on, among others, the theory of planned behavior. In a cross-sectional online survey, the psychological determinants of people's decisions about prudent AB use were examined in a sample of 1,228 Swiss adults. The questionnaire assessed respondents' demand for AB, willingness to adopt measures that prevent the need for AB, perceived risks of ABR, perceived benefits of AB, attitudes and social influences regarding AB, knowledge of AB and ABR, and cultural values. Mokken scale analysis revealed three types of knowledge: knowledge of the functioning of AB, of ABR, and of preventive measures. Structural equation modeling indicated that respondents' demand for AB was mostly predicted by social influences, perceived benefits of AB, and knowledge of AB functioning. Willingness to prevent AB use was mainly related to conservative values, perceived risks of ABR, negative attitudes toward AB, and knowledge of preventive measures. Our study suggests that the provision of information about AB and preventive measures is a first step toward changing people's decisions related to prudent AB use. Future interventions that additionally utilize cultural values to convey important messages and target additional factors, such as social influences, the risks of ABR, and the benefits of cautious AB use, can be more successful in promoting prudent AB use.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1488-1503"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e4/7d/RISA-42-1488.PMC9544676.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39629114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

But They Told Us It Was Safe! Carbon Dioxide Removal, Fracking, and Ripple Effects in Risk Perceptions. 但他们告诉我们这是安全的！二氧化碳去除、水力压裂和风险认知中的连锁反应。

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-02 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13717

Emily Cox, Nick Pidgeon, Elspeth Spence

{"title":"But They Told Us It Was Safe! Carbon Dioxide Removal, Fracking, and Ripple Effects in Risk Perceptions.","authors":"Emily Cox, Nick Pidgeon, Elspeth Spence","doi":"10.1111/risa.13717","DOIUrl":"10.1111/risa.13717","url":null,"abstract":"Reaching net-zero for global greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050 will require a portfolio of new technologies and approaches, potentially requiring direct removal and sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide using negative emissions technologies (NETs). Since energy and climate systems are fundamentally interconnected it is important that we understand the impacts of policy decisions and their associated controversies in other related technologies and sectors. Using a secondary analysis of data from a series of deliberative workshops conducted with lay publics in the United Kingdom, we suggest that perceptions of CO2 removal technologies were negatively impacted by risk perceptions and recent policy decisions surrounding shale gas and fracking. Using the social amplification of risk framework, we argue that heightened risk perceptions have extended via \"ripple effects\" across these technologies. Participants' attitudes were underpinned by deeper misgivings regarding the actions and motives of experts and policymakers; a pervasive discourse of \"but they told us it was safe\" regarding fracking negatively affected people's trust in assurances of the safety and efficacy of CO2 removal. This has the potential to undermine attempts to build societal agreement around future deployment of CO2 removal technologies.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1472-1487"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25428797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Markov Decision Process Approach for Cost-Benefit Analysis of Infrastructure Resilience Upgrades. 基于马尔可夫决策过程的基础设施弹性升级成本效益分析。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-14 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13838

Qianru Zhu, Benjamin D Leibowicz

{"title":"A Markov Decision Process Approach for Cost-Benefit Analysis of Infrastructure Resilience Upgrades.","authors":"Qianru Zhu, Benjamin D Leibowicz","doi":"10.1111/risa.13838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13838","url":null,"abstract":"As climate change threatens to cause increasingly frequent and severe natural disasters, decisionmakers must consider costly investments to enhance the resilience of critical infrastructures. Evaluating these potential resilience improvements using traditional cost-benefit analysis (CBA) approaches is often problematic because disasters are stochastic and can destroy even hardened infrastructure, meaning that the lifetimes of investments are themselves uncertain. In this article, we develop a novel Markov decision process (MDP) model for CBA of infrastructure resilience upgrades that offer prevention (reduce the probability of a disaster) and/or protection (mitigate the cost of a disaster) benefits. Stochastic features of the model include disaster occurrences and whether or not a disaster terminates the effective life of an earlier resilience upgrade. From our MDP model, we derive analytical expressions for the decisionmaker's willingness to pay (WTP) to enhance infrastructure resilience, and conduct a comparative static analysis to investigate how the WTP varies with the fundamental parameters of the problem. Following this theoretical portion of the article, we demonstrate the applicability of our MDP framework to real-world decision making by applying it to two case studies of electric utility infrastructure hardening. The first case study considers elevating a flood-prone substation and the second assesses upgrading transmission structures to withstand high winds. Results from these two case studies show that assumptions about the value of lost load during power outages and the distribution of customer types significantly influence the WTP for the resilience upgrades and are material to the decisions of whether or not to implement them.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1585-1602"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39522517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Bayesian networks for risk analysis and decision support. 贝叶斯网络用于风险分析和决策支持。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13938

Anca M Hanea, Annemarie Christophersen, Sandra Alday

{"title":"Bayesian networks for risk analysis and decision support.","authors":"Anca M Hanea, Annemarie Christophersen, Sandra Alday","doi":"10.1111/risa.13938","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13938","url":null,"abstract":"For over 40 years, there have been significant advancements in the theory, methods, and application of risk analysis (Greenberg et al., 2020). The focus of the field has been on answering questions ranging from the identification of what can go wrong to how key stakeholders can be informed of the outcomes of risk analysis for purposes of decision making (Greenberg et al., 2012). A key challenge analysts and decisionmakers face is the treatment of uncertainty in risk models. This challenge has remained at the forefront of risk science and can be traced back to the early efforts of risk quantification (Kaplan & Garrick, 1981). Risk analysts have thus employed progressively more powerful methods over time to estimate and explain the magnitude of risk and uncertainty. There has been much intellectual investment into predictive modeling to forecast and measure risk more precisely. The field has benefited from technological developments that have made significant amounts of cross-sectional and longitudinal data available for risk analysis. Increased data availability has also made increasingly sophisticated risk assessments possible (Choi & Lambert, 2017; Greenberg et al., 2020). However, despite having large amounts of data available, the lack of precision in characterizing the size, usefulness, and robustness of data remain (Nateghi & Aven, 2021). Despite significant advancements in the long history of risk science (Aven & Flage, 2020), uncertainty remains in the complex and dynamic risk environment. Risk analysts continue to grapple with issues of incorporating uncertainty in dynamic risk models, while key stakeholders constantly face the pressures of decision making under evolving and highly challenging conditions. This special issue explores the employment of Bayesian networks (BNs, also called Bayes nets or Bayesian belief networks) as a versatile and powerful framework to model complex systems, (e.g., Pourret et al., 2008) and for reasoning and decision making under uncertainty (Jensen, 1996).","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"1149-1154"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40406471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Trust, Perceptions of Risks and Benefits, and Normative Acceptance of Approaches for Restoring American Chestnut Trees. 信任，风险和利益的感知，以及恢复美洲栗树方法的规范接受。

IF 3.8

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-24 DOI: 10.1111/risa.13766

Joshua D Petit, Mark D Needham, Glenn T Howe

{"title":"Trust, Perceptions of Risks and Benefits, and Normative Acceptance of Approaches for Restoring American Chestnut Trees.","authors":"Joshua D Petit, Mark D Needham, Glenn T Howe","doi":"10.1111/risa.13766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13766","url":null,"abstract":"This article examined trust, perceived risks and benefits, and normative acceptance associated with using breeding and genetic engineering (GE) to restore American chestnut (AC) trees. Questionnaires were completed by a random representative sample of the public in the United States (n = 278) and a purposive sample of forest interest groups (FIG) such as scientists and managers (n = 195). These concepts were examined in relation to breeding (breed the AC with chestnut trees from Asia) and GE (add the oxalate oxidase [OxO] gene from bread wheat to the AC) approaches for mitigating chestnut blight and restoring AC trees. The public sample considered adding the gene from bread wheat (GE) to be more beneficial and slightly more acceptable, but also slightly riskier, compared to the breeding approach. The FIGs viewed the breeding approach to be more acceptable, less risky, and more beneficial than the GE approach. The FIGs viewed both approaches as less risky, more beneficial, and more acceptable than did the public sample. Path analysis showed that: (i) perceived environmental benefits were the strongest predictors of normative acceptance of both approaches for the public sample, (ii) perceived environmental risks were the strongest predictors of acceptance of both approaches for the FIGs, (iii) human benefits and risks were mostly unrelated to acceptance, and (iv) trust in government agencies charged with managing forests was only weakly associated with benefits, risks, and acceptance. Implications of these results for both research and management were discussed.","PeriodicalId":517072,"journal":{"name":"Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"470-486"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/risa.13766","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39105779","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3