Risk Assessment versus Risk Management GEOG 558 Hazards and Risk Management Dr. Chrys Rodrigue

Risk Assessment Science Identifies hazards, mechanisms that create or trigger them, social processes putting people in their way Identifies hazards, mechanisms that create or trigger them, social processes putting people in their way Physical sciences: geology, physical geography, meteorology, climatology, hydrology, oceanography Physical sciences: geology, physical geography, meteorology, climatology, hydrology, oceanography Life sciences: epidemiology, toxicology, medical geography, biogeography, ecology, botany, zo ölogy Life sciences: epidemiology, toxicology, medical geography, biogeography, ecology, botany, zo ölogy Social sciences: psychology, sociology, anthropology, human geography, health geography, political science, economics Social sciences: psychology, sociology, anthropology, human geography, health geography, political science, economics Applied sciences: Applied sciences: Physical, e.g., engineering Physical, e.g., engineering Life, e.g., medicine, nursing Life, e.g., medicine, nursing Social, e.g., public health, planning, social work Social, e.g., public health, planning, social work

Risk Management Decision-making functions: Decision-making functions: "Boots on the ground: "Boots on the ground: Professional first responders Professional first responders Pre-first responders Pre-first responders Emergency medical services Emergency medical services Policy: Policy: Planners Planners Administrators in first response agencies Administrators in first response agencies Managers in hospitals, ports, utilities, OES, FEMA, DHS, petrochemical companies Managers in hospitals, ports, utilities, OES, FEMA, DHS, petrochemical companies Elected policy decision-makers (politicians) Elected policy decision-makers (politicians)

Uncertainty Risk assessment science deals with uncertainties Risk assessment science deals with uncertainties Hazard-generating processes never perfectly understood Hazard-generating processes never perfectly understood Irreducibly stochastic processes Irreducibly stochastic processes Hypothesis testing a good analogy Hypothesis testing a good analogy Type I error: false positives Type I error: false positives Type II error: false negatives Type II error: false negatives Need to imagine the worst consequences of either type Need to imagine the worst consequences of either type Minimize the error type that's the worst Minimize the error type that's the worst But minimizing one raises probability of the other But minimizing one raises probability of the other Science generally minimizes Type I (0.05 prob-value) Science generally minimizes Type I (0.05 prob-value) Business may be harder hit by a Type II error, so slacker standards may be used (0.10 or higher) Business may be harder hit by a Type II error, so slacker standards may be used (0.10 or higher) American legal system designed to minimize Type I American legal system designed to minimize Type I

Assessment Meets Management Scientists must communicate with managers Scientists must communicate with managers Have to get across any uncertainties in analysis Have to get across any uncertainties in analysis Assessment is junior to (answers to) management Assessment is junior to (answers to) management Managers have preferences and biases Managers have preferences and biases Precautionary principle: Precautionary principle: Err on the side of safety Err on the side of safety Use slacker standards to trigger positive actions Use slacker standards to trigger positive actions This creates opportunity costs This creates opportunity costs De minimis principle: De minimis principle: Concept of acceptable risk Concept of acceptable risk Demand highest certainty to trigger any action Demand highest certainty to trigger any action This could let a hazardous process ramp up while waiting for the best science … all the way past any chance to do anything This could let a hazardous process ramp up while waiting for the best science … all the way past any chance to do anything

Assessment Meets Management Climate change Climate change 97% of earth scientists are convinced that global climate is changing, at an increasing rate, and that humans are responsible for most to all of it 97% of earth scientists are convinced that global climate is changing, at an increasing rate, and that humans are responsible for most to all of it 63% of Americans think climate change is real, but 23% think climate warming is a hoax 63% of Americans think climate change is real, but 23% think climate warming is a hoax Only 22% of Americans know that "more than 80%" of climate scientists think climate change is happening Only 22% of Americans know that "more than 80%" of climate scientists think climate change is happening Petrochemical campaign to "manufacture uncertainty" and demand perfect confidence before action can be taken Petrochemical campaign to "manufacture uncertainty" and demand perfect confidence before action can be taken Tobacco Tobacco Tobacco companies used the "manufacture uncertainty" idea Tobacco companies used the "manufacture uncertainty" idea Staved off effective regulation from the 1950s to Staved off effective regulation from the 1950s to Again, demands for perfect confidence before action Again, demands for perfect confidence before action

Assessment Meets Management Marked differences may exist between risk assessors and risk managers in the same organization: Marked differences may exist between risk assessors and risk managers in the same organization: Tolerance of uncertainty Tolerance of uncertainty Different notions of the standards for action in the face of uncertainty (95% confidence? 99%? ?) Different notions of the standards for action in the face of uncertainty (95% confidence? 99%? ?) Precautionary or de minimis? Precautionary or de minimis? How can scientists present data and trends AND explain uncertainties, so that managers can understand enough to pick actions based on their own philosophies? How can scientists present data and trends AND explain uncertainties, so that managers can understand enough to pick actions based on their own philosophies? Managers face their own Type I and Type II risk situations: Managers face their own Type I and Type II risk situations: Impose regulations to mitigate a non-existent risk and waste resources and deny opportunities to constituents? Impose regulations to mitigate a non-existent risk and waste resources and deny opportunities to constituents? Dismiss a real risk as random noise and have it blow up catastrophically, followed by the media "blame-seeking missile"? Dismiss a real risk as random noise and have it blow up catastrophically, followed by the media "blame-seeking missile"?