تحسين النتائح
ترتيب حسب
من
الى
الصفحة 1
الصفحة 1
Managing Critical Infrastructure Risks
At the beginning of each year, there is a deluge of top-10 lists on just about every subject you can imagine. A top-10 list of biggest news stories, best-selling books, most popular music and movies, richest companies, and best places to visit or live. It seems everyone has his or her own top-10 list, reflecting, perhaps, differences in regional, national, and cultural values. Companies and governments most often tend to focus their top-10 lists on economic priorities, or priorities related to national defense, security, public health, and new infrastructure. This year, 2007, was no exception. Yet, increasingly, we see governments, private organizations, and companies advocating a new type of prioritization. This framework needs to reach beyond the realms of economics, world trade, and corporate management to include the environment, stakeholders, public preferences, and social goals. Moreover, corporations and individuals are not only interested in generic 10-best lists; they want lists tailored to their values, goals, and current economic and social state. For example, the U. S.
Comparative risk assessment and environmental decision making
Decision making in environmental projects is typically a complex and confusing process characterized by trade-offs between socio-political, environmental, and economic impacts. Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) is a methodology applied to facilitate decision making when various activities compete for limited resources. CRA has become an increasingly accepted research tool and has helped to characterize environmental profiles and priorities on the regional and national level. CRA may be considered as part of the more general but as yet quite academic field of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Considerable research in the area of MCDA has made available methods for applying scientific decision theoretical approaches to multi-criteria problems, but its applications, especially in environmental areas, are still limited. The papers show that the use of comparative risk assessment can provide the scientific basis for environmentally sound and cost-efficient policies, strategies, and solutions to our environmental challenges.
