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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P.77 Marynissen, H*; Ladkin, D; Denyer, D; Pilbeam, C; Cranfield University; hugo@pm.be The constitutive role of communication for coordinated safety behavior in an organization managing high-hazardous processes The dissemination of safety procedures and guidelines is perceived as pivotal to keep organizations managing high-hazardous technologies incident free. The role of clear communication is seen as essential in the transferring of these procedures and guidelines. However, previous research in a gas-receiving terminal clearly indicates how every single individual in that organization holds divergent perceptions of the present risks. This suggests that the transmitting of information through various forms of communication fails to create a uniform perceived interpretation of the potential risks in an organization. Hence, these variable risk perceptions might actually endanger safe operations. On the other hand, the gas terminal that was the subject of this research has been operating accident-free for more than twenty years. This is at odds with the average number of fatal accident rates in onshore gas companies. Therefore it might be argued that this gas terminal achieves some form of coordinated safety behavior, based on a differing way of relating within the organization. In an attempt to uncover this coordinated safety behavior, this research explores the interactive processes between all staff. Based on Social Network Analysis and qualitative interviews it indicates how the ongoing conversations about safety and risk avoidant behavior constitute a safety culture in this gas-receiving terminal. Furthermore, it fundamentally adds knew insights to the existing knowledge in the field of “communication constitutes organization” research (CCO), and more specifically to the use of CCO in High Reliability Organizations. Finally, recommendations for practice and viable directions for further research are indicated. T3-F.1 Mason, AM*; Risotto, S; Wise, K; American Chemistry Council; ann_mason@americanchemistry.com The importance of access to underlying data Many stakeholders make substantial investments in research to support product development, health, safety and environmental protection, and to comply with product stewardship and regulatory policies. This research is often conducted to provide input federal agencies and programs such as EPA, NIEHS, NTP, NCI and ATSDR. In addition, stakeholders have an interest in many of the influential scientific assessments that are conducted by these agencies. While not regulations, they are often the trigger or basis for regulatory requirements. While publications summarizing the results of federally funded research may be available, the underlying data and details on study design and statistical analysis generally are not available. Without these details, it is difficult to thoroughly understand critical information that forms the basis for federal decisions related to a specific substance. It is similarly difficult to verify analyses independently or conduct alternative statistical evaluations. With limited openness, the opportunity for robust stakeholder engagement and independent scientific analysis suffers. This talk will summarize and provide examples discussing the importance of access to underlying data and some of the challenges that have been confronted. P.42 Matteo Convertino, MC*; Rafael Munoz-Carpena, RMC; Greg Kiker, GK; Stephen Perz, SP; University of Florida (on leave), and Emerging Pathogens Institute at the University of Florida; matteoc@umn.edu Design of Ecosystem Monitoring Networks by Value of Information Optimization: Experiment in the Amazon Effective monitoring of ecosystems is crucial for assessing and possibly anticipating shifts, quantifying ecosystem services, and decision making based on these shifts and services. The selection of monitoring sites is typically suboptimal following local stakeholder or research interests that do not allow to capture the whole ecosystem patterns and dynamics. Here we propose a novel model for the design of optimal monitoring networks for biodiversity based on the concept of the value of information (VoI). We consider the trinational frontier among Brazil, Peru, and Bolivia as a case study. Using a multiresolution texture-based model we estimate species richness and turnover on satellite imagery as a function of different sets of information coming from plot data organized in network topologies. The optimal monitoring network is the network that minimizes the integrated VoI defined as the variation of the VoI in the 28 years considered. This is equivalent to minimize the sum of the species turnover of the ecosystem. We identify the small world network as the optimal and most resilient monitoring network whose nodes are the hotspots of species richness. The hotspots are identified as the sites whose VoI is the highest for the whole period considered. Hence, the hotspots are the most valuable communities for inferring biodiversity patterns and the most ecologically valuable according to the richness - resilience hypothesis. The small world monitoring network has an accuracy ∼ 50% higher than other network topologies in predicting biodiversity patterns. The network that results from the optimal trade-off between data value with their uncertainty and relevance, has deep implications for understanding ecosystem function and for management decisions. Hence, because of the optimal integration of environmental, social, and economical factors the model allows a sustainable monitoring and planning of biodiversity for the future. T4-D.3 Matthew E. Bates, MEB*; Jeff M. Keisler, JMK; Benjamin A Wender, BAW; Niels Zussblatt, NZ; Igor Linkov, IL; US Army Corps of Engineers; matthew.e.bates@usace.army.mil Prioritizing hazard research for three nanomaterials through value of information analysis Nanotechnologies are potentially hazardous and EHS research will continue to be needed as new materials are developed and new products transition to market. High uncertainty about basic material properties and limited time and research funding suggest that nanotechnology research needs to be prioritized. This prioritization can be done through Value of Information (VoI) analysis, which we apply to nanomaterial research related to hazard identification. We implement VoI as global Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses on the uncertainty in a hazard-banding identification space to rank parameters whose resolution is most expected to change inferred material hazard scores. This provides a path towards prioritizing hazard-related research strategies in their own right and per dollar spent in terms of expected improvements in classification. We implement this capability with the hazard banding assumptions of CB Nanotool to prioritize hazard research for MWCNT, Nano Ag, and Nano TiO2 particles based on material properties estimated from the literature and expert judgment. Anticipated improvements in hazard classification accuracy and are compared with possible losses from misclassification and research costs to discuss which research strategies seem most promising, with implications for future research policy. December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T1-G.4 McCright, AM; Michigan State University; mccright@msu.edu The Politics of Climate Science and Policy Effective policy response to climate change may require substantial public support for greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Since the mid-1990s, there has been significant political polarization on climate change among U.S. political elites. Such polarization extended to the general public in the early 2000s to the point that liberals and Democrats are more likely to report beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus and express personal concern about global warming than are conservatives and Republicans. Several studies find that political orientation moderates the relationship between educational attainment and climate change beliefs. That is, the effect of educational attainment on global warming beliefs and concern are positive for liberals and Democrats, but are weaker or negative for conservatives and Republicans. Given the well-documented campaign in the USA to deny the reality and seriousness of climate change (a major goal of which is to 'manufacture uncertainty' in the minds of policy-makers and the general public), I examine the influence that perception of the scientific agreement on global warming has on the public's beliefs about global warming and support for government action to reduce emissions. Using nationally representative survey data from March 2012, I find that misperception of scientific agreement among climate scientists is associated with lower levels of support for government action to reduce emissions. This confirms the crucial role of perceived scientific agreement on views of global warming and support for climate policy. Further, I show that political orientation has a significant influence on perceived scientific agreement, global warming beliefs, and support for government action to reduce emissions. These results suggest the importance of improving public perception of the scientific agreement on global warming, but in ways that do not trigger or aggravate ideological or partisan divisions. T3-J.3 McGartland, Al*; Ferris, Ann; Environmental Protection Agency; mcgartland.al@epa.gov Employment Impacts in Benefit-Cost Analyses Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) is one of the dominant paradigms for evaluating regulatory decisions. In 2011, President Obama reaffirmed BCA’s role with Executive Order 13563. Traditionally, employment impacts have not been incorporated into benefit-cost analysis. Many noneconomists are surprised to learn that benefit-cost analysis methods generally do not account for possible employment impacts. Surprisingly, this issue has not been given sufficient attention by labor, macro or environmental economists. We do not have a generalized theory to provide guidance on how to account for employment impacts in benefit-cost analysis. The current underperforming economy has motivated renewed questions about how economists do account for employment changes in benefit-cost analysis (and other regulatory analyses.) Author will discuss the various conceptual and empirical approaches for accounting for job impacts in regulatory analyses. W3-A.2 McKone, TE; University of California, Berkeley; temckone@lbl.gov Comparative risk, life-cycle impact, and alternatives assessments: Concepts and perspectives In order to identify, characterize, and compare opportunities for increasing the sustainable use of energy, resources, chemicals, and materials, we need reliable and informative environmental, health and economic impact assessments. In this talk I consider the different objectives and approaches used in comparative risk assessments, life-cycle impact assessments, and alternatives assessments as tools to support chemical decision-making. The goal of a risk assessment is to quantify the likelihood of harm in a format that assists decision makers who must act to tolerate, mitigate, or eliminate the potential harm. This goal is distinct from impact studies that strive to develop indicators of harm, measures of hazard, or ranking schemes. These latter activities focus more on characterizing the possibility of harm. Both hazard and risk relate to some measure of harm, such as number of deaths or diseases, financial loss, species loss, resource privation, etc. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has become an important tool for the environmental impact assessment of products and materials. Businesses are increasingly relying on it for their decision-making. The information obtained from an LCA can also influence environmental policies and regulations. Life-cycle impact assessment is the phase of LCA aimed at understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts of a product system. Alternatives assessments (AA) came out of the US EPA Design for Environment program and focus on hazard characterization based on a full range of human health and environmental information. AA strives to inform technology choices so as to minimize the potential for unintended consequences. In comparing these different approaches, I will consider the extent to which they address the possibility of harm and/or the probability of harm and whether and how the approaches confront uncertainty. M2-B.1 Meek, ME; University of Ottawa; bmeek@uottawa.ca Evolution of Weight of Evidence Assessment in Mode of Action Analysis The World Health Organization (WHO)/International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) mode of action/human relevance (MOA/HR) framework has been updated to reflect evolving experience in its application and to incorporate recent developments in toxicity testing and non-testing methods. The modified framework is incorporated within an iterative roadmap, encouraging continuous refinement of problem formulation, mode of action based testing strategies and risk assessment. It can be used as originally intended, where the outcome of chemical exposure is known, or in hypothesizing potential effects resulting from exposure, based on information on putative key events in established modes of action from appropriate in vitro or in silico systems and other evidence. It clarifies the conceptually synonymous terms of MOA and adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) and builds on experience in ever increasing numbers of case studies to additionally inform weight of evidence analysis for hypothesized modes of action. The modified Bradford Hill (BH) considerations have been additionally articulated to simplify application and a template for comparative assessment of weight of evidence and associated uncertainty for various modes of action developed. The contribution of these developments to weight of evidence considerations in related initiatives will be addressed. December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD
Page 1 and 2:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts W
Page 3 and 4:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P
Page 5 and 6:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 7 and 8:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts M
Page 9 and 10:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P
Page 33 and 34: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 41 and 42: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts M
Page 43 and 44: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts W
Page 81: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
show all

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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?