مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد قوت استدلال های استانداردسازی مدیریت ریسک – الزویر ۲۰۲۳

مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد قوت استدلال های استانداردسازی مدیریت ریسک – الزویر ۲۰۲۳

 

مشخصات مقاله
ترجمه عنوان مقاله در مورد قوت استدلال های مربوط به استانداردسازی در مقررات مدیریت ریسک
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله On the strength of arguments related to standardization in risk management regulations
نشریه الزویر
انتشار مقاله سال ۲۰۲۳
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی ۱۷ صفحه
هزینه دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد.
نوع نگارش مقاله
مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article)
مقاله بیس این مقاله بیس میباشد
نمایه (index) Scopus – Master Journal List – JCR
نوع مقاله ISI
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی  PDF
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF)
۶٫۵۰۳ در سال ۲۰۲۰
شاخص H_index ۱۲۵ در سال ۲۰۲۲
شاخص SJR ۱٫۴۳۸ در سال ۲۰۲۰
شناسه ISSN
۰۹۲۵-۷۵۳۵
شاخص Quartile (چارک) Q1 در سال ۲۰۲۰
فرضیه ندارد
مدل مفهومی دارد
پرسشنامه ندارد
متغیر ندارد
رفرنس دارد
رشته های مرتبط مدیریت
گرایش های مرتبط مدیریت کسب و کار – مدیریت اجرایی
نوع ارائه مقاله
ژورنال
مجله  علم ایمنی – Safety Science
دانشگاه Division of Risk Management and Societal Safety, Lund University, Sweden
کلمات کلیدی استانداردسازی – مدیریت ریسک – تنظیم ریسک – تجزیه و تحلیل استدلال – مطالعه محدوده – استاندارد ریسک – مقررات مدیریت ریسک
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی Standardization – Risk management – Risk regulation – Argument analysis – Scoping study – Risk standard – Risk management regulation
شناسه دیجیتال – doi
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105998
لینک سایت مرجع https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092575352200337X
کد محصول e17285
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله  ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید.
دانلود رایگان مقاله دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله سفارش ترجمه این مقاله

 

فهرست مطالب مقاله:
Abstract
۱ Introduction
۲ Method
۳ Conducting the scoping study
۴ Arguments related to standardization in risk management regulations
۵ Argument analysis
۶ Discussion
۷ Conclusions
Declaration of Competing Interest
Acknowledgement
Appendix A. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Appendix B. Strength of argument assessment
References

بخشی از متن مقاله:

Abstract

     Risk-informed decision-making is a key concept in regulatory regimes covering a wide range of technical disciplines and risk domains. Increased standardization in terms of highly prescriptive and detailed requirements is observed in various risk management regulations and application areas. This development has spurred a discussion with equally strong voices promoting and opposing standardization of risk. The aim of this paper is to explore the knowledge base from scientific literature related to effects of standardization of risk and to assess the strength of the arguments used in the discussion. Through a scoping study and a systematic argument analysis, this study contributes to the debate on the most adequate approach to standardization in risk management regulations. Conclusions from the study are that effects of standardization of risk management regulations are not widely covered in scientific literature and empirical evidence is largely lacking to support the arguments used. The argument analysis indicate that many arguments are assessed as being weak, interconnected and even contradictory. It seems not possible to come to a conclusion and reach agreement in the discussion if the strengths of standardization outweigh the weaknesses. Thus, the discussion should be in the form of dialectic rather than debate. Acknowledging, understanding and addressing the various arguments in favour of and rejecting standardization, as well as their respective context, is essential when designing risk management regulations. Future research efforts are required to further explore when and how the risk management and risk governance processes can be standardized and the appropriate level of standardization.

Introduction

     Managing and governing risk is at the core of regulatory regimes covering land-use planning, process safety, occupational health and safety, security, environmental protection and many other technical disciplines and risk domains. The practices of risk-informed decision-making processes are implemented differently in different regulations. Some regulatory regimes require risk assessments to be performed and used for decision-making without defining how they should be conducted and used. Others are more standardized in terms of providing prescriptive requirements on key risk management components such as risk analysis methodologies, assumptions, modelling tools, data input, evaluation criteria, etc. Viewing the level of detail prescribed in risk management regulations as representing the level of standardization, highly prescriptive regulatory regimes then represent high level of standardization whereas regulations with lesser prescriptive requirements represent low level of standardization. Standardization in risk management regulations can be applied to individual elements of the risk management and risk governance processes (e.g. risk analysis) or the entire process.

Conclusions

     The main conclusions from this scoping study and argument analysis are that effects of standardization of risk management regulations are not widely covered in scientific literature and empirical evidence is largely lacking to support arguments advocating and opposing standardization of risk management regulations. Although not often underpinned by empirical evidence, there are, however, strong opinions and multiple arguments promoting and opposing standardization. Assessing if the strengths of standardization outweigh the weaknesses is subjective and highly contextual. Even if the argument analysis presented in this paper indicates that many of the arguments are labelled weak, they should not be disregarded since the arguments may be logically correct and intuitively reasonable even if they lack appropriate empirical backing in the particular publication(s).

ثبت دیدگاه