7.2 The Engineer's Approach To Risk

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1

7.

2 THE ENGINEER’S APPROACH TO RISK


Risk as the Product of the Probability and Magnitude of Harm
Risk:
- A compound measure of the probability and magnitude of adverse effect.
- Risk is something that can be objectively measured.
- The product of the likelihood and magnitude of harm.
Harm:
- An invasion or limitation of a person’s freedom or well-being.
- Harm in terms of thing can be relatively easily quantified.
Example:
- Collapse building due to faulty design, resulting in economic loss to the owner or worse death
for the inhabitants.
- Measured in terms of number of lives lost, cost of rebuilding and repairing work.

Utilitarianism and Acceptable Risk


Utilitarianism:
- The probability and magnitude of harm and contains no implicit evaluation of weather a risk is
morally acceptable.
- The product of the probability and d magnitude of harm is equalled or exceeded by the product
of the probability and magnitude of the benefit.
- Determining the course of action that maximizes well-being.
Adaptation of cost-benefit analysis:
- It may not be possible to anticipate all of the effects associated with each option.
- It is not always easy to translate all of the risk and benefits into monetary terms.
- Cost-benefit analysis in its usual application makes no allowance for the distribution of costs
and benefits.
- The cost-benefit analysis gives no place for informed consent to the risk imposed by technology.

Expanding the Engineering Account of Risk: The Capabilities Approach to Identifying Harm and
Benefit
Limitation of identifying harm in engineering:
1. Often only the immediately apparent or focal consequences of a hazard are included.
o Hazard can have auxiliary consequence, or broader and more indirect harms to society.
2. Both natural and engineering hazard might create opportunities.
o Focusing not only the negative impact but also the positive impact also.
3. There remains a need for an accurate, uniform and consistent metric to quantify the
consequence from a hazard.
o No satisfactory methods for quantifying the non-fatal physical or psychological harms to
individuals or society.
4. Current techniques do not demonstrate the connection between specific harms or losses.
o Instead effect on quality of life that is ultimately at issue when considering risk.
Capabilities approach:
- Capabilities can be little lower, temporarily, as long no permanent damage is caused and people
do not fall below an absolute minimum.
- Capture the adverse effect and opportunities of hazard beyond the consequence traditionally
considered.
- Focus attention on what should be primary concern in assessing the societal impact of a hazard.
- A principled foundation for judging the acceptability and tolerability of risk.

You might also like