Abstract
In this paper, we discuss the importance of systems thinking when using the As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) principle to support decision-making in risk management. The ALARP principle is a fundamental principle in risk management, stating that risk-reducing measures should be implemented, provided that the costs are not grossly disproportionate to the obtained benefits. Different tools are used to verify ALARP and gross disproportion; by large, however, the underlying thinking appears to be focused on single measures in isolation. This way of thinking can lead to misguided decision support, potentially resulting in lower than intended effect on safety and overinvestments. Firstly, considering a measure in isolation does not necessarily lead to an appropriate weighting of the relevant uncertainties. Secondly, focusing on safety measures in isolation can prevent all relevant costs and benefits associated with a particular measure from being identified and then considered in the ALARP process. It is with respect to these issues that the paper aims to contribute to the understanding of how to interpret the ALARP principle in risk management. Without systems thinking, we argue that ALARP and the gross disproportion criterion are likely to be based on a foundation that ignores important factors.
Highlights
It is well known that the adoption of safety measures is essential, to reduce risks related to future activities posing safety or environmental concerns with respect to something that humans value
These issues will be addressed in the following, as we discuss the importance of systems thinking when using the As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) principle in risk management
The risk analysis of the new situation indicates that the risks on platform A are acceptable according to the risk acceptance criterion (RAC), but the guiding principle for the company's approach to risk reduction is that the ALARP principle shall be applied for all relevant dimensions of risks and personnel safety – ALARP must be demonstrated and verified
Summary
It is well known that the adoption of safety measures is essential, to reduce risks related to future activities posing safety or environmental concerns with respect to something that humans value. Regardless of the method used to verify gross disproportion, we see from the literature and practice that the ways in which ALARP is understood, implemented and verified are alike, with respect to an underlying way of thinking that largely ignores the system in which the measure is implemented This way of thinking can lead to misguided decision support, especially for two reasons that we address in this paper. It is reasonable to question whether systems thinking leads to decision support that is in contrast with the common understanding of the ALARP principle These issues will be addressed in the following, as we discuss the importance of systems thinking when using the ALARP principle in risk management.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
