Iscram crsis management-renn-2013

382 views

Published on

Towards Increased Resilience: The Contributions of IT for Crisis Preparedness and Risk Communication

Ortwin Renn's Keynote opening the ISCRAM 2013 Conference in Baden-Baden

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
382
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • This slide proposes the overarching scheme.a5-step protocol…Ortwin, we need to decide at which level this protocole has to be placed:The organisation identifies an ER: it needs to characterise it, to develop scenarios of its possible evoluation, to evaluate to tolerance to it, etcUpstream, the organisation has not yet identified anything special (or it has but this is not yet the purpose), but it needs to organise to be able to identify potential threats
  • Your concept of an emerging risk is not consistent with the definition of risk in ISO 31000.   Risk is risk.  Risk comes about when a decision or action is taken based on deficient information in support of objectives.  Risk is not:·      An event;·      A consequence;·      A likelihood;·      A vulnerability;·      An exposure;·      A hazard, a threat or an opportunity;·      A metric. Therefore it cannot be said that risk occurs or 'emerges'.  If you need to talk about something that 'emerges' it should be a risk source.  This is defined as an "element which alone or in combination has the intrinsic potential to give rise to risk". I hope that you will be able to make the necessary amendments to your advertising materials and bear this important point in mind when you hold your workshop. Best regards, Grant Grant Purdy Associate DirectorBROADLEAF CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL PTY LTDSpecialists in strategic, enterprise and project risk managementPO Box 1098North Mitcham, VIC 3132 AustraliaTel         +61 3 9893 0011Mobile    +61 412 121 631Skype     +61 3 9018 5782Email      Purdy@Broadleaf.com.au
  • Risk management is possible when several options are considered, assessed and then one or several are chosen as a strategy. For example, a precautionary approach is no more than one of several options for managing a possible risk on which the level of knowledge is inadequate; there can be other risk management option which can have the same outcome (cf J Wiener on … comparing the use of precaution in the US and the EU)Need to avoid binary options (yes or no) (MM). What lies in-between yes and no need to be exploredWhat can we doThese generic strategies can be used to generate more concrete options. The debate upstream will be enhanced if we indicate a strong presumption on favour of more options.1) Influence the contributing factors (to try to take away the causes), that is: act on the factors of risk. This is mainly for when an emerging risk is not yet identified but there is a suspicion that the context could be favourable to its emergence – because CF can also amplify and attenuate identified emerging risks, acting on the CF should be a continuous priority.This includes a pro-active communication strategy (MW).2) Change the risk tolerance level (raise it); that is act on the risk absorbing system, increase robustness3) Improve the resilience of the system; that is be prepared for shocks or unexpected surprises.4) Invest in air-tight monitoring, that is: do more monitoring, seek more signals from early-warning systems (especially when one does not know what to do). One aim is to screen for false-positive and false-negatives. 
  •  
  • This would be Sweta’s part of the presentation
  • This would be Sweta’s part of the presentation
  • This would be Sweta’s part of the presentation
  • Iscram crsis management-renn-2013

    1. 1. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 1|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Towards Increased Resilience: TheContributions of IT for CrisisPreparedness and Risk CommunicationOrtwin RennUniversity of StuttgartISCRAM 2013 Baden-BadenChemin de Balexert 9, CH – 1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland | tel +41 (0)22 795 17 30 fax +41 (0)22 795 17 39 | www.irgc.org
    2. 2. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 2|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Need for Prevention and Anticipation1. Definition of Crisis:A situation of immediate threat to crucial functions of relevant systems thatserve critical human needs and wants based on the release ofenergy, substance or information2. First Priority: Anticipating emerging crisis with the goal of prevention3. Second Priority: Developing a system of emergency preparedness thatreduces the impact of crisis4. Third priority: Assuring recovery after the crisis has occurred
    3. 3. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 3|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012IRGC’s RISK GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
    4. 4. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 4|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012A Protocol for Anticipating and Preventing CrisesOption assessmentand evaluationDescribing thecontextidentification&characterisationScenariodevelopmentRisk tolerance/preference/attitudeOption creationImplementingand monitoring- Amplification- AttenuationCommunicationConventional RiskgovernanceIIIIIIIVV
    5. 5. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 5|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012II Scenario Development-1The organisation needs to develop narratives about the possiblethreats and their interactions with other systems to which they areconnectedScenarios should include best and worst case but also abackcasting approach of defining a desirable crisis responseand determining the steps to reach such an outcomeScenarios should be accompanied by a thorough sensitivityanalysisOrganization should simulate responses to each of the scenariosin order to be prepared. Simulation tools such a agent-basedmodels are key to anticipating “realistic” crisis situations
    6. 6. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 6|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012II Scenario Development-2Other Methods for “anticipating” pending crises:–Signal observation (early warning by indicators)–Dynamic monitoring–Modelling–Technological foresight–Horizon scanning–Using “Swarm Intelligence”: Crisis-Pedia .
    7. 7. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 7|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012III Strategic Risk HandlingScenarios give rise to multiple intervention points in anormally escalating development of potential threats(time-dependent)Decision makers need to agree in advance at whichpoint in the timeline of potential crisis events anintervention is crucial and which level of escalation isstill tolerableThis exercise needs to be performed for each scenarioA close monitoring system is necessary to understandwhich scenario is likely to occur and when interventionpoints are likely to pop up
    8. 8. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 8|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012IV Option Creation / Design IThere exist 4 broad strategies:1. Influence the contributing factors• Place special emphasis on interactions of contributing factors.2. Change the risk tolerance level (raise it);• focus on the risk absorbing system; increase robustness3. Improve the resilience of the system;• that is be prepared for shocks or unexpected surprises.4. Do more monitoring, seek more signals from early-warning systems.that is to be on alert the further you move on the timeline+ Pro-active communication strategy
    9. 9. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 9|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012IV Option Creation/Design IIIf different scenarios are played out and there is no clearindication which one is going to occur, the IRGCframework suggests a management strategy based onresilience. This implies:–Being prepared for the worst scenario to occur–Investing in reducing vulnerabilities–Trying to contain risk in space and time–Be prepared to intervene instantaneously if things turnout to be worse than expected
    10. 10. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 10|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012V Option Assessment and Evaluation IIt is necessary to have a set of options ready for eachintervention point on each scenarioTypes of intervention will be tested against:–Effectiveness–Efficiency–Sustainability (economic, ecological, social)–Socio-political acceptability (for example equity)–Ethical standards (corporate responsibility)Computer-Aided decision tools are helpful inconducting this multi-criteria evaluation
    11. 11. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 11|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012V Option Assessment and Evaluation /IIElements for how to evaluate the options (which leads toprioritising and determining a strategy for managing the emergingcrsis) include:–analyse the distribution of risks and benefits: when they alignwell, risks are easier to manage and to communicate–identify a “risk owner”, who will be responsible for managing it.–work on the specific case of “moral hazard”, when no oneowns the risk (often the case with emerging risk to theenvironment, but also as we have seen in the financialsystems or in public health, e.g. with pandemics)
    12. 12. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 12|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012CommunicationIn the early phases of risk governance, internalcommunication is crucial (early warning system mustbe well established in organisational hierarchy)For developing scenarios, identifying interventionopportunities and designing intervention options, theinclusion of external experts and stakeholders is crucialfor successIn the late phases of risk governance externalcommunication is central to reputation managementand external support (internet is key to dissemination)
    13. 13. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 13|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Institutional RequirementsPreparing for emerging crises requires special organisationalstructures and procedures:–Organisations need departments or units that perform early warningfunctions and have direct access to key decision makers within theorganisation.–Staff in these departments need to be trained to produce scenariosand intervention points in a coherent and convincing manner.–It is advisable to use computer simulation methods to illustrate thesescenarios and make them more plausible to those who need toprepare interventions.–For developing scenarios and identifying options for eachintervention point, staff members should be trained to use theappropriate communication tools,–Once a risk is identified, there needs to be a department or unit thatdeals with the external communication to the media and the public.
    14. 14. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 14|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Conclusions1. The possibility of crises and disaster are part of technological change, andrequires anticipatory preventive actions, not just emergency preparedness2. Coping with emerging crises requires a more dynamic governance modelthat provides a timeline for various scenarios of risks and opportunities3. Prudent management includes the identification of potential interventionpoints and pre-set tolerance levels for justifying interventions or non-action4. Assessment of opportunities and risks have to be updated constantly(adaptive management and continuous monitoring)5. Depending on the phase in the timeline different communication targetsneed to be addressed6. Much of what is needed is common sense yet, without institutional andorganizational structures and procedures in place, routines will bedominating the process and ignorance is likely to win over vigilance
    15. 15. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 15|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Additions1. EXTRA Slides
    16. 16. World Congress on Risk International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) 16|Sydney, July 18-20, 2012Communication IICommunicating emerging risks faces specific challenges thatgo beyond traditional risk communication problems:–Disbelief in the existence of a threat (discarded as undue pessimism)–Blame-the-messenger attitude when potential risks are reported todecision makers–Messages about risks are likely to get little attention whenorganization is performing with great success–Language barriers (decision makers not familiar with multiplescenarios and simulations)–Dominance of a “wait and see” attitude if decision makers are facedwith multiple uncertainties–Decision makers have often little sensitivity to amplificationprocesses when crucial intervention points have been missed

    ×