Lessons in risk- versus resilience-based design and management
Corresponding Author
Jeryang Park
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA.Search for more papers by this authorThomas P Seager
School of Sustainable Engineering & the Built Environment, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
Search for more papers by this authorP Suresh C Rao
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Jeryang Park
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA.Search for more papers by this authorThomas P Seager
School of Sustainable Engineering & the Built Environment, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
Search for more papers by this authorP Suresh C Rao
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2051, USA
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
The implications of recent catastrophic disasters, including the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident, reach well beyond the immediate, direct environmental and human health risks. In a complex coupled system, disruptions from natural disasters and man-made accidents can quickly propagate through a complex chain of networks to cause unpredictable failures in other economic or social networks and other parts of the world. Recent disasters have revealed the inadequacy of a classical risk management approach. This study calls for a new resilience-based design and management paradigm that draws upon the ecological analogues of diversity and adaptation in response to low-probability and high-consequence disruptions. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2011;7:396–399. © 2011 SETAC
REFERENCES
- Aven T. 2011. On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Anal 31: 515–522.
- BBC 2011 Mar 23. Japan says quake rebuilding to cost as much as 25tn yen. BBC News.
- Bourne JK Jr. 2004. Gone with the water. Natl Geogr Mag 206: 88–105.
- Chang SE. 2009. Infrastructure resilience to disasters. The Bridge 39: 36–41.
- Clery D. 2011. Current designs address safety problems in Fukushima reactors. Science 331: 1506.
- Colten CE, Kates RW, Laska SB. 2008. Three years after Katrina: Lessons for community resilience. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 50: 36–47.
- Colten CE, Sumpter AR. 2009. Social memory and resilience in New Orleans. Nat Hazards 48: 355–364.
- Det Norske Veritas. 2011. Forensic examination of deepwater horizon blowout preventer. Washington DC: US DOI, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement. EP030842.
- Fiksel J. 2003. Designing resilient, sustainable systems. Environ Sci Technol l 37: 5330–5339.
- Fischetti M. 2001. Drowning New Orleans. Sci Am 285: 76–85.
- Graham B, Reilly WK, Beinecke F, Boesch DF, Garcia TD, Murray CA, Ulmer F. 2011. Deep water: The Gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore drilling (report to the President). National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
- Hammer D. 2010. Sep 05. Five key human errors, colossal mechanical failure led to fatal Gulf oil rig blowout. The Times-Picayune.
- Hollnagel E, Woods DD, Leveson N. 2006. Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. Aldershot (UK): Ashgate Pub Co.
-
Klein RJT,
Nicholls RJ,
Thomalla F.
2003.
Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept?
Glob Environ Change Part B: Environ Hazards
5:
35–45.
10.1016/j.hazards.2004.02.001 Google Scholar
- Korhonen J, Seager TP. 2008. Beyond eco-efficiency: A resilience perspective. Business Strategy Environ 17: 411–419.
- Lohr S. 2011. Mar 19. Stress test for the global supply chain. The New York Times.
- McGuire RK. 2008. Seismic risk mitigation decisions under uncertainty. Risk Governance Soc 14: 185–198.
- Minoura K, Imamura F, Sugawara D, Kono Y, Iwashita T. 2001. The 869 Jogan tsunami deposit and recurrence interval of large-scale tsunami on the Pacific coast of northeast Japan. J Nat Dist Sci 23: 83–88.
- Mu D, Seager TP, Rao PS, Park J, Zhao F. 2011. A resilience perspective on biofuels production. Integr Environ Assess Manag (forthcoming). Available from: doi: 10.1002/ieam.165
- Normile D. 2011a. Devastating earthquake defied expectations. Science 331: 1375–1376.
- Normile D. 2011b. Scientific consensus on great quake came too late. Science 332: 22.
- Onishi N, Glanz J. 2011 Mar 27. Japanese rules for nuclear plants relied on old science. The New York Times.
- Pettit TJ, Fiksel J, Croxton KL. 2010. Ensuring supply chain resilience: Development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Business Logistics 31: 1–21.
- Pritchard D, Lacy KD. 2010. Deepwater well complexity–The new domain. DHSG White Paper, Successful Energy Practices International, LLC.
- Reichhardt T. 2004. Hurricane Ivan highlights future risk for New Orleans. Nature 431: 388.
- Rinaldi SA, Peerenboom JP, Kelly TK. 2001. Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Contr Syst Mag 21: 11–25.
- Rosenthal E. 2011 March 21. Radiation, once free, can follow tricky path. The New York Times.
- Sieg L. 2011. Mar 15. Japan government losing public trust as nuclear crisis worsens. Reuters.
- Tabuchi H, Bradsher K. 2011 Apr 9. Lack of data heightens Japan's nuclear crisis. The New York Times.
- US Coast Guard. 2011. Incident specific preparedness review (ISPR) BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. United States Coast Guard.
- Vespignani A. 2010. The fragility of interdependency. Nature 464: 984–985.
- Westrum R. All coherence gone: New Orleans as a resilience failure. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Resilience Engineering; 2006; Juan-Ies-Pins, France. p 8-10.
- Zhou HJ, Wang JA, Wan JH, Jia HC. 2010. Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic perspective. Nat Hazards 53: 21–41.
