22.04.2014 Views

Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

SRA 2013 Annual Meeting <strong>Abstracts</strong><br />

W4-C.3 Bessette, DL*; Campbell-Arvai, V; Arvai, JL; University<br />

of Calgary; dlbesset@ucalgary.ca<br />

A decision support framework <strong>for</strong> developing regional<br />

energy strategies<br />

Developing energy strategies requires more than just technical<br />

skill and subject-matter expertise, it requires the ability to<br />

identify and prioritize objectives, construct—and <strong>for</strong>ecast the<br />

consequences of—alternatives, and confront tradeoffs. These<br />

elements must be incorporated into a decision-making<br />

framework that also allows <strong>for</strong> public participation and<br />

deliberation and does so in a rigorous, transparent and<br />

defensible manner. If the ultimate goal is to in<strong>for</strong>m policy, then<br />

such a process must also be iterative and rapidly deployable.<br />

This paper reports on a structured decision-making (SDM)<br />

framework deployed in Michigan in 2012 (n = 182) and then<br />

again in Alberta, Canada in 2013 (n > 500). This online<br />

framework not only incorporated the above elements into the<br />

energy-strategy development process, but also <strong>for</strong> the first time<br />

allowed stakeholders to construct their own portfolios of energy<br />

alternatives. Previous work in this field has asked participants<br />

to compare and assess a small number of portfolios (6-10), with<br />

each portfolio focusing on unique objectives. The current<br />

framework, using real, context-specific energy constraints and<br />

demands, asked participants to build portfolios by choosing<br />

from twenty different fuel and energy types, and<br />

emission-mitigation technologies, while also examining how<br />

those portfolios per<strong>for</strong>med and compared across six key<br />

objectives. The framework also included a portfolio-ranking<br />

task and swing weighting of objectives. Participants reported<br />

high satisfaction, com<strong>for</strong>t with the process in<strong>for</strong>ming real<br />

decisions, and low cognitive difficulty and overall stress. By<br />

comparing pre- and post-framework knowledge levels,<br />

participants exhibited significantly more knowledge gain in<br />

treatments that involved portfolio construction, as compared to<br />

participants in treatments that omitted the construction<br />

element. Finally, participants’ portfolio ranks and a separate<br />

rank order generated using a linear additive value model show<br />

that participants’ decisions may not be internally consistent.<br />

M2-G.1 Binder, AR*; Zechman, EM; North Carolina State<br />

University; arbinder@ncsu.edu<br />

Recycled water and risk communication: How citizens<br />

evaluate new technologies <strong>for</strong> municipal water systems<br />

Population growth, drought, and climate change increase the<br />

stresses on water supply, and the potential <strong>for</strong> increased water<br />

scarcity has drawn attention to the possibilities of water reuse<br />

<strong>for</strong> re-engineering the urban water cycle. However, research<br />

indicates that consumers may have an initial reaction of disgust<br />

to the idea of using recycled water, and scholars have there<strong>for</strong>e<br />

investigated ways to encourage adoption of its use. Because of<br />

the possibility of initial negative reactions, there is a substantial<br />

set of existing literature on how citizens assess subjective risks<br />

of technologies and how those perceptions and interpretations<br />

reverberate throughout a social system. The current study<br />

builds upon the psychometric and social amplification of risk<br />

frameworks by investigating how citizens make sense of a new<br />

technology to augment water supplies in their communities.<br />

With a representative survey of adults residing in the United<br />

States, we measured knowledge, attitudes, interest, behavioral<br />

intentions, and other variables surrounding the issue of<br />

recycled water. Our data offer a novel look at individual- and<br />

social-level sense-making of a new, immediately tangible<br />

technology carrying a unique risk signal. Preliminary findings<br />

indicate that risk/benefit evaluations of recycled water are not<br />

only based on psychological factors such as trust and<br />

knowledge, but also highly influenced by social factors such as<br />

interpersonal discussion and social networks. Our findings<br />

contribute to applied knowledge about the relationship between<br />

activities that municipal water utilities may or may not control,<br />

such as educational campaigns or word-of-mouth<br />

communication, to gain insight to the factors that may drive the<br />

success of plans by cities and towns to incorporate recycled<br />

water into their water supply infrastructure.<br />

W3-K.3 Bjerga, T*; Aven, T; University of Stavanger;<br />

torbjorn.bjerga@uis.no<br />

Adaptive risk management using the new risk<br />

perspectives – an example from the oil and gas industry<br />

This paper discusses management of risk in case of large<br />

uncertainties, and the use of adaptive risk management in such<br />

situations. This type of management is based on the<br />

acknowledgement that one best decision cannot be made but<br />

rather a set of alternatives should be dynamically tracked to<br />

gain in<strong>for</strong>mation and knowledge about the effects of different<br />

courses of action. In the paper we study a case from the oil and<br />

gas industry, the main aim being to gain insights on how the<br />

adaptive risk management could be implemented when giving<br />

due attention to the knowledge and uncertainty aspects of risk.<br />

In recent years several authors have argued <strong>for</strong> the adoption of<br />

some new types of risk perspectives which highlight<br />

uncertainties and knowledge rather than probabilities in the<br />

way risk is understood and measured - the present paper is<br />

using these perspectives as the basis <strong>for</strong> the discussion.<br />

W4-E.2 Boelter, FB; ENVIRON International;<br />

fboelter@environcorp.com<br />

<strong>Risk</strong> Assessment as a Core Competency <strong>for</strong> Industrial<br />

Hygiene<br />

Industrial hygiene developed out of public health initiatives and<br />

evolved with the industrialization of modern society. Industrial<br />

hygienists are frequently referenced as the original health risk<br />

assessors. We will cover what is risk and how the four step<br />

paradigm in<strong>for</strong>ms occupational exposure assessments. We will<br />

discuss risk characterization and perception as well as the<br />

various concepts of risk and the different thoughts about safe<br />

and zero risk. We will look at human behaviors and modes of<br />

action such as tending to underweight false alarms and waiting<br />

to act until a hazard is imminent. We will also examine<br />

occupational health parallels to public health and<br />

environmental exposures assessments and the concept of “Fit<br />

<strong>for</strong> Purpose”. We will discuss core competencies <strong>for</strong> the<br />

occupational hygienist related to risk assessment, risk<br />

characterization, risk management, and risk communication.<br />

Often our professional language is one of comparisons following<br />

numerical calculations. Most of the time our audience is<br />

attuned to a different nontechnical, more intuitive language.<br />

We need to effectively convey our in<strong>for</strong>mation to those whose<br />

behaviors we are trying to influence. We will also explore risk<br />

related initiatives being undertaken in the occupational hygiene<br />

community to develop and make available methods and tools<br />

<strong>for</strong> risk-based decision-making. Such tools include decision<br />

analysis, cost-benefit analysis (or benefit-cost analysis),<br />

cost-effectiveness analysis, comparative risk analysis, and<br />

value-of-in<strong>for</strong>mation analysis. Many of these approaches were<br />

developed outside of the occupational hygiene profession but<br />

within the context of environmental, medical, and financial<br />

decision-making, yet they are well-suited <strong>for</strong> use in<br />

occupational settings. By conveying the risk of outcomes in a<br />

manner that aligns with the verbiage and context of “risk”,<br />

occupational hygienists will be able to sit at the planning table<br />

and pull the resources needed to continue the important work<br />

of focusing resources needed to adequately protecting workers.<br />

December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!