Introduction to risk management Mikko Pohjola, Jouni Tuomisto THL

Conventional perspectives to risk management

RA by Red book

Million euro cycle Lessons from the centre of excellence of environmental health risk analysis

Orange book Role and importance of deliberation

IRGC Interface of assessment, management, and government

Open risk management

Definition of risk 1 Covello and Merkhofer

Definition of risk 2 Jouni Tuomisto

Definition of risk 3 In this course, we use the word risk in a loose/broad sense. Risk = impact (good, bad) The probability of risk may be low, high, or even 1. Why? Because you treat favourable and harmful, likely and unlikely impacts all in the same way.

Questions in risk management What is the problem? Who is responsible for the problem? What are the possible decisions/actions? What are the objectives? What are the outcomes to be monitored? Who are influenced by the problem? Who are influenced by the actions?

Risk management of bus traffic in Kuopio What are the problems? What are potential actions? What are outcomes of interest? Who decides? Who acts?

Is there a theory for RM? Context: you must understand this to be able to operate Find a decision or decisions that are reasonable and relevant Essential parts: context, research question, decision(s), objectives RA-RM process

Open risk management: overview Q R A

Risk management Also, we could use the term ”impact management” instead of ”risk management”. This is just a matter of tradition. (But if we had called this course Open assessment and impact management, the professors hadn’t been interested in including the course in ToxEn MSc studies.)

Open risk management: context All risks emerge in a society (or group). The society observes the risks, valuates them, is afraid of them, suffers from them, manages them, and adapts to them.

Definition of open risk management How can scientific information and value judgements be organised for improving societal situations by identifying potential decisions and relevant outcomes in a situation where open participation is allowed? Emphasis: The decision situation should be clarified.

Machine for risk management within a society Identify a problem. Formulate it as a (decision) question. Perform argumentation about it. Create hypotheses. Attack and remove poor hypotheses. Make conclusions. Act based on the conclusions.

Definition of open assessment How can scientific information and value judgements be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed? Emphasis: The decision situation is clear, focus on choosing good options.

Difference between OA and ORM There is no clear separation between open assessment and open risk management. If your decision options are clear (for the moment), you are more on OA side. However, be prepared for surprises and revisiting your original questions (RM).

Theory of open risk management Incremental improvements Everyone involved The idea of justice as one basis Decision analysis as one basis after we know what the decision is Open assessment/trialogue as one basis as the method to reach shared understanding.

Assessment, management, and communication A traditional view separates Risk assessment (by scientists) Risk management (by decision-makers) Risk communication (by all, but especially to stakeholders) However, in trialogue there is no need for separation.

There is no science-policy interface The most important tools for making science and making policy are the same. Making artificial separations only confuse and slow down efficient actions. This is not obvious, though. Why?

What are science and policy? ”Science is what a scientist does.” ”Policy is what a politician does.” We know how is a scientist and who is a politician. We can answer the question by observation. This is a reasonable assumption, if the current way is the best way to make science and policy. Is it?

What is the best way to make science and policy? You cannot answer by observing. However, you can find problems by observing and then try to understand why they exist. You can start from the ultimate objective and then try to find efficient methods to reach it.

Different roles in decision-making Authority (has the decision-making power) Policy-maker (develops policies to be decided) NGO Industry and other commercially interested parties Other stakeholders Citizens Anyone

Independence of assessors? How to ensure that science is objective? What if assessments are only made to justify existing decisions? Can political pressures be overcome if scientists step out of the ivory tower? (Should this topic be discussed in more detail eg. In a decision analysis lecture?)

Concepts in the theory Problem(s) identified (something wrong with the world) Decisions (as responses to problems) Partners/actors: Decision maker of a particular decision (may be several decisions) Those influenced in any way Everyone else

Performance Context about what we actually aim to achieve. How do we know if we succeeded?