Risk Control Options

Estimate and compare cost effectiveness of each option, in terms of cost per unit risk reduction, keeping in mind a life cyxle perspective Rank risk control options on their cost effectiveness Estimate and compare cost effectivmess of each option, in terms espected benefit of vulnerabilirt reduction versus bnplememation cost, keeping in mind a life cycle perspective Rank vulnerability control options on their cost effectiveness Benefits of mitigating measures can also include benefits to normal operation (e.g increased fexibility). -Issess wfticA stakeholders pa and which would incur loss... 

The development and implementation of such a methodology enables the realization of instant identification of vulnerable critical systems and automatic selection of optimal risk control options. 

Practical implementation of necessary changes and risk control options. 

Hierarchy of risk control options and principles, and selection of countermeasures to provide a reduction in risk... 

Risk control options for reducing work activity injury... 

Cost-benefit assessment for each risk-control option and... 

Propose risk control options. This step is concerned with proposing effective and practical risk-control options. The results of the previous steps are used to identify high-risk areas in order to propose appropriate risk-control measures. 

Identify benefits from reduced risks and costs. This step is concerned with the identification of benefits from reduced risks and costs associated with the implementation of each of the previously identified risk-control options. 

Chapter 9 describes a framework for the identification and quantification of human error in fishing vessel operation, following a brief review of human error assessment techniques. This framework ranks the impact of human error and further integrates the available risk control options into the analysis. The approach uses Analytical Hierarchy Processing (AHP) theory to rank the preference of each control option. The advantages of employing the AHP technique are discussed and the integration of such a technique within the FSA framework is described. 

The process of risk assessment is initially performed qualitatively and later extended quantitatively to include data when it becomes available, l e interactions and outcomes of both these methods are seen in Figure 3.3. Using the quantified method, risk evaluation can be carried out to determine the major risk contributors and the analysis can be attenuated to include cost beneftt assessment of the risk control options. 

The next step aims to propose effective and practical Risk Control Options (RCOs). Focusing on areas of the risk profile needing control, several RCOs are developed and recorded in a Risk Control Measure Log (RCML). Upon identifying all possible RCOs from the estimated risks, the RCOs in the RCML are used to generate a Risk Control Option Log (RCOL). Hie information in the RCOL will be used in Step 4 of the FSA process. 

Upon gathering the various control options, the next step is to carry out a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) on each option. CBA aims at identifying the benefits from reduced risks and costs associated with the implementation of each risk control option for comparison. The evaluation of costs and benefits may be conducted using various techniques (IMO (1993)). It should be initially carried out for the overall situation and then for those interested entities influenced by the problem consideration. 

The final step is the decision-making phase, which aims at making decisions and giving recommendations for safety improvement. At this point, the various stakeholders interest in the vessel under study is considered. The cost and benefit applicable to each stakeholder have to be determined in order to decide the best risk control option - each RCO will have a different... 

Determine Risk Control Options (RCOs) - Considering the system/operation under study, determine several options that could address the risks estimated (associated with each task defined in Step 2). 

This Chter describes a method using AHP to achieve this aim. The approach integrates the risk control option within the human error assessment framework to determine the best option for the identified hazards. The advantages of using the described approach for fishing vessels include ... 

In this Chapter, only human errors are considered in the analysis. However, this can be extended to include failures induced by other causes, such as machinery failure. Hence, it can be easily integrated into the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) framework as discussed in Cht ter 5. Step 4 of the FSA framework requires the evaluation of different risk control options. The AHP method presented here can be used for this purpose, and the results obtained from the analysis can be applied to Step 5 of an FSA. 

---