Management of risks - a Paradox?

Session description from the NEON Conference (Nettverk for organisasjonsforskning i Norge). The conference was held 23.11.16 - 24.11.16, in Tromsø

Tar kraftselskapene klimaendringene på alvor? Beslutningstaking eller beslutningsvegring i startfasen av en potensiell krise?

Master's thesis in Risk management and societal safetySamfunnet er svært avhengig av en velfungerende kraftforsyning. Leveringssikkerheten av strøm er god i dag, men hva kan vi vente fremover i forhold til fremtidens klima? I denne oppgaven har vi sett på om kraftselskapene tar klimaendringene på alvor. Det har vi gjort ved å svare på to underspørsmål: I hvilken grad har kraftselskapene fattet beslutninger nå for å sikre en robust kraftforsyning frem i tid? Hvorfor er eventuelle beslutninger fattet – eller ikke fattet? For å svare på spørsmålene er 11 personer i 4 kraftselskaper intervjuet. Det er i tillegg hentet inn informasjon fra andre skriftlige kilder. Det er ikke mulig å svare entydig ja eller nei på spørsmålet om kraftselskapene tar klimaendringene som trussel mot robustheten på alvor. Vi finner forskjeller mellom selskapene. Noen har kommet et stykke på vei. De øvrige har ikke satt tema på dagsorden, men de signaliserer at de i større grad vil ivareta klimaendringene fremover. Felles for alle de 4 selskapene er imidlertid at de tar klima på alvor, det er en del av hverdagen. Oppgaven har en arbeidshypotese om at de tre faktorene risikopersepsjon, omdømme og handlingsrom påvirker om det blir tatt beslutninger om tilpasning til klimaendringene. For den første faktoren, risikopersepsjon, er konklusjonen at klimaendringene ikke blir sett som en stor risiko. Enkelte har av den grunn avstått fra å kartlegge egen sårbarhet. Andre har gjort seg egne erfaringer med klima og valgt å være proaktive. For den andre faktoren, omdømme, er konklusjonen at omdømme ikke har særlig betydning. Begrunnelsen er at omgivelsene ikke uttrykker noen forventning om klimatilpasninger. Konklusjonen for den siste faktoren er at selskapene mener at handlingsrommet fastsatt av reguleringsregimet til NVE hindrer større klimatilpasninger. Selskapene etterspør informasjon om klimaendringene. Kunnskapsutvikling kan være et bidrag for å påvirke risikopersepsjon samt gi beslutningstakerne et tryggere beslutningsgrunnlag

The process of integrating risk management: usefulness, standardisation and adaptation

In this paper we analyse how a municipality set out to integrate risk management throughout an organisation with more than 9000 employees in six divisions and over 100 sub-units. An objective was to ensure coherence in risk management related work conducted in various sub-units in the municipality. Being forerunners, those involved had to find their own way. We identify three focus areas of importance in the integration process: usefulness, standardisation and adaptation. We describe and discuss the activities within these focus areas, and their value to the integration process. We collected the data in this study over a six-year period. The period encompasses the development from intention, where only a few people were involved, to realisation in divisions and sub-units. The study is delimited to risk management related to safeguarding the population

Identifying hazards to include in risk analyses

A risk analysis should provide decision makers with information regarding relevant hazards. The initiating phase, where the risk analysts identify hazards to be included in the risk analysis, lays the foundation for the rest of the analysis. This phase is, therefore, of great importance. In this paper, we examine how risk analysts in a municipal setting identified potential adverse events and how they chose which ones to analyse in the risk analysis. The municipalities under study had important similarities with respect to exposure to hazards and government regulation. With these similarities as a starting point and studying how the initiating phase took place, the paper focuses on impact regarding the uniformity of adverse events. Looking at events included in the Comprehensive Risk and vulnerability Analyses (CRAs), seems to reveal a predominance of uniformity. This is reasonable given the previously mentioned similarities. It is arguably also a result of many risk analysts using the same sources to retrieve ideas of potential hazards. The latter is alarming when considering risks not listed in these sources, like emergent or local risks

Identifying hazards to include in risk analyses

Open Access, by the CCBY 4.0 Link to publisher's version:https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781351174657 https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.1201/9781351174664-238/identifying-hazards-include-risk-analyses-leonhardsen-olsen-nilsenA risk analysis should provide decision makers with information regarding relevant hazards. The initiating phase, where the risk analysts identify hazards to be included in the risk analysis, lays the foundation for the rest of the analysis. This phase is, therefore, of great importance. In this paper, we examine how risk analysts in a municipal setting identified potential adverse events and how they chose which ones to analyse in the risk analysis. The municipalities under study had important similarities with respect to exposure to hazards and government regulation. With these similarities as a starting point and studying how the initiating phase took place, the paper focuses on impact regarding the uniformity of adverse events. Looking at events included in the Comprehensive Risk and vulnerability Analyses (CRAs), seems to reveal a predominance of uniformity. This is reasonable given the previously mentioned similarities. It is arguably also a result of many risk analysts using the same sources to retrieve ideas of potential hazards. The latter is alarming when considering risks not listed in these sources, like emergent or local risks.publishedVersio