Abstract
Regulatory health, safety, and environment (HSE) interventions have an impact on both costs and benefits for the industry. It is common for the regulators to evaluate such interventions by providing a comparison of costs and benefits as a basis for decision-making. Fulfilling an assignment for the Norwegian government, two consulting companies proposed a methodology for regulatory evaluation in the petroleum industry. This methodology acknowledges that uncertainty must have a higher weight than given through traditional cost–benefit analyses, but it is still to a great extent based on the use of expected values. We question this use of modified cost–benefit analyses for providing decision support in contexts where uncertainty is the dominating attribute. Furthermore, we argue that the decision-makers should be able to take a dynamic approach, where the chosen method should fit its context. As an example, we present a framework in line with such a dynamic approach. The article is an extended version of an ESREL conference article.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.