在考虑监管HSE干预措施时,如何管理不确定性

IF 2.3 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Leif Inge K. Sørskår , Eirik B. Abrahamsen
{"title":"在考虑监管HSE干预措施时,如何管理不确定性","authors":"Leif Inge K. Sørskår ,&nbsp;Eirik B. Abrahamsen","doi":"10.1007/s40070-017-0073-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Regulatory health, safety, and environment (HSE) interventions have an impact on both costs and benefits for the industry. It is common for the regulators to evaluate such interventions by providing a comparison of costs and benefits as a basis for decision-making. Fulfilling an assignment for the Norwegian government, two consulting companies proposed a methodology for regulatory evaluation in the petroleum industry. This methodology acknowledges that uncertainty must have a higher weight than given through traditional cost–benefit analyses, but it is still to a great extent based on the use of expected values. We question this use of modified cost–benefit analyses for providing decision support in contexts where uncertainty is the dominating attribute. Furthermore, we argue that the decision-makers should be able to take a dynamic approach, where the chosen method should fit its context. As an example, we present a framework in line with such a dynamic approach. The article is an extended version of an ESREL conference article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44104,"journal":{"name":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40070-017-0073-0","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On how to manage uncertainty when considering regulatory HSE interventions\",\"authors\":\"Leif Inge K. Sørskår ,&nbsp;Eirik B. Abrahamsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40070-017-0073-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Regulatory health, safety, and environment (HSE) interventions have an impact on both costs and benefits for the industry. It is common for the regulators to evaluate such interventions by providing a comparison of costs and benefits as a basis for decision-making. Fulfilling an assignment for the Norwegian government, two consulting companies proposed a methodology for regulatory evaluation in the petroleum industry. This methodology acknowledges that uncertainty must have a higher weight than given through traditional cost–benefit analyses, but it is still to a great extent based on the use of expected values. We question this use of modified cost–benefit analyses for providing decision support in contexts where uncertainty is the dominating attribute. Furthermore, we argue that the decision-makers should be able to take a dynamic approach, where the chosen method should fit its context. As an example, we present a framework in line with such a dynamic approach. The article is an extended version of an ESREL conference article.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EURO Journal on Decision Processes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40070-017-0073-0\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EURO Journal on Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S219394382100073X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S219394382100073X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

监管健康、安全和环境(HSE)干预措施对行业的成本和收益都有影响。监管机构通常会通过提供成本和收益的比较来评估这种干预措施,作为决策的基础。为完成挪威政府的一项任务,两家咨询公司提出了一种石油行业监管评估方法。这种方法承认不确定性必须比传统的成本效益分析具有更高的权重,但它在很大程度上仍然基于期望值的使用。在不确定性占主导地位的情况下,我们质疑这种使用修正成本效益分析来提供决策支持的做法。此外,我们认为决策者应该能够采取动态的方法,其中所选择的方法应该适合其上下文。作为一个例子,我们提出了一个与这种动态方法一致的框架。本文是ESREL会议文章的扩展版本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On how to manage uncertainty when considering regulatory HSE interventions

Regulatory health, safety, and environment (HSE) interventions have an impact on both costs and benefits for the industry. It is common for the regulators to evaluate such interventions by providing a comparison of costs and benefits as a basis for decision-making. Fulfilling an assignment for the Norwegian government, two consulting companies proposed a methodology for regulatory evaluation in the petroleum industry. This methodology acknowledges that uncertainty must have a higher weight than given through traditional cost–benefit analyses, but it is still to a great extent based on the use of expected values. We question this use of modified cost–benefit analyses for providing decision support in contexts where uncertainty is the dominating attribute. Furthermore, we argue that the decision-makers should be able to take a dynamic approach, where the chosen method should fit its context. As an example, we present a framework in line with such a dynamic approach. The article is an extended version of an ESREL conference article.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信