RSS Feed News
Richard Gowland to Chair Session at Industrial Technologies 2010 Conference
02/09/2010
EPSC Technical Director, Richard Gowland, is to chair a session on integrating safety into emerging technologies at the development stage, to take part on 7th September at Industrial Technologies 2010.
» read more
2006-2008 Seveso 2 Implementation Report Made Available
23/08/2010
A summary of EU Member State reports of Seveso data covering the period 2006 to 2008 has been made available by the European Commission.
» read more
CFPB To Hold Workshop On Land Use Planning For LPG
11/08/2010
The Comité Français du Propane et Butane (CFPB) is to hold a one day workshop next month in Paris on Industrial Safety and Land-use Planning around LPG establishments.
» read more
EPSC Strategic Review on Process Safety Competence
11/08/2010
EPSC has initiated a strategic review on process safety competence which it expects to publish mid 2011, for which it is requesting input.
» read more
Stuxnet Worm Webinar - Details of Process Control Malware
11/08/2010
IndustrialDefender hold a series of webinars on Stuxnet, the first malware found to deliberately target industrial process control software.
» read more

International Risk Governance Council Report on Risk Governance Deficits

05/02/2010
The International Risk Governance Council has published a report on Risk Governance Deficits available here:

Risk Governance Deficits - An analysis and illustration of the most common deficits in risk governance

The report does not relate to industrial process, but is a comprehensive study of risk management for major incidents in general. Specifically, the potential hazards and tripfalls within a risk assessment process are examined, falling into two broad categories: failure to understand the risk, and failure to respond appropriately to the risk. The aim of this report is to improve the principles used to handle situations in which there is no established standard of good practice.

Quoted below from the report are the ten major problems of understanding risk and thirteen problems in responding to risk. Each of these are given consideration in relation to historic examples from fields as diverse as ecology to economics.
  • (A1) the failure to detect early warnings of risk because of erroneous signals, misinterpretation of information or simply not enough information being gathered;
  • (A2) the lack of adequate factual knowledge for robust risk assessment because of existing gaps in scientific knowledge or failure to either source existing information or appreciate its associated uncertainty
  • (A3) the omission of knowledge related to stakeholder risk perceptions and concerns.
  • (A4) the failure to consult the relevant stakeholders, as their involvement can improve the information input and the legitimacy of the risk assessment process (provided that interests and bias are carefully managed);
  • (A5) the failure to properly evaluate a risk as being acceptable or unacceptable to society;
  • (A6) the misrepresentation of information about risk, whereby biased, selective or incomplete knowledge is used during, or communicated after, risk assessment, either intentionally or unintentionally.
  • (A7) a failure to understand how the components of a complex system interact or how the system behaves as a whole, thus a failure to assess the multiple dimensions of a risk and its potential consequences;
  • (A8) a failure to recognise fast or fundamental changes to a system, which can cause new risks to emerge or old ones to change;
  • (A9) the inappropriate use of formal models as a way to create and understand knowledge about complex systems (over- and under-reliance on models can be equally problematic).
  • (A10) is the acknowledgement that understanding and assessing risks is not a neat, controllable process that can be successfully completed by following a checklist. Rather, this deficit is about assessing potential surprises.


  • (B1) a failure to respond adequately to early warnings of risk, which could mean either under or over-reacting to warnings;
  • (B2) a failure to design effective risk management strategies. Such failure may result from objectives, tools or implementation plans being ill-defined or absent;
  • (B3) a failure to consider all reasonable, available options before deciding how to proceed;
  • (B4) not conducting appropriate analyses to assess the costs and benefits (efficiency) of various options and how these are distributed (equity);
  • (B5) a failure to implement risk management strategies or policies and to enforce them;
  • (B6) a failure to anticipate the consequences, particularly negative side effects, of a risk management decision, and to adequately monitor and react to the outcomes;
  • (B7) an inability to reconcile the time-frame of the risk issue (which may have far-off consequences and require a long-term perspective) with decision-making pressures and incentives (which may prioritise visible, short-term results or cost reductions);
  • (B8) a failure to adequately balance transparency and confidentiality during the decision-making process, which can have implications for stakeholder trust or for security.
  • (B9) a lack of adequate organisational capacity (assets, skills and capabilities) and/or of a suitable culture (one that recognises the value of risk management) for ensuring managerial effectiveness when dealing with risks;
  • (B10) a failure of the multiple departments or organisations responsible for a risk’s management to act individually but cohesively, or of one entity to deal with several risks.
  • (B11) a failure to deal with the complex nature of commons problems, resulting in inappropriate or inadequate decisions to mitigate commons-related risks (e.g., risks to the atmosphere or oceans);
  • (B12) a failure to resolve conflicts where different pathways to resolution may be required in consideration of the nature of the conflict and of different stakeholder interests and values;
  • (B13) insufficient flexibility or capacity to respond adequately to unexpected events because of bad planning, inflexible mindsets and response structures, or an inability to think creatively and innovate when necessary.