Methodology for security risk assessments—is there a best practice?

Maal, Maren; Busmundrud, O; Endregard, Monica

doi:10.1201/9781315374987-129

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many aspects of these new standards have led to debates in the academic and practical communities. The debates have mainly centred on the new risk concept proposed in the standards (Askeland, Flage, and Aven, 2017;Jore, 2017), the problems of excluding probability and uncertainty assessments from security risk analysis (Jore and Egeli, 2015;Maal, Busmundrud, and Endregard, 2017), and the problematic implications of constructing a different risk concept for security from that for safety (Askeland, Flage, and Aven, 2017;Jore, 2017). However, no one seems to ask the overall question: Is counterterrorism a phenomenon that fits the logic of standardization?…”

Section: Norwegian Terrorism Management In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…and Ringstad, 2012;Bowker and Star, 2000). Nevertheless, a literature review of the current state of affairs of security risk analysis concluded that no 'best practice' exists for how to conduct security risk analysis (Maal, Busmundrud, and Endregard, 2017). Although a variety of risk assessment tools are available, a robust empirical foundation does not yet exist for understanding the risk of terrorism, or involvement, or the outcomes of violent extremist activity (Borum, 2015).…”

Section: Security Is a Non-event With No Best Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Standardization and Risk Governance

Olsen¹,

Juhl²,

Lindøe³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This multidisciplinary book conceptualizes, maps, and analyses ongoing standardization processes of risk issues across various sectors, processes, and practices. Standards are not only technical specifications and guidelines to support efficient risk governance, but also contain social, political, economic, and organizational aspects. This book presents a variety of standardization processes and applications of standards that may influence our judgements of risk, the organizing of risk governance, and, accordingly, our behaviour. Standardization and standards can impact risk governance in different ways. The most important lessons drawn from the present volume can be summarized in three areas: (1) how standardization might impact on power relations and interests; (2) how standardization may change flexibility in decision-making, communication, and cooperation; and (3) how standardization could (re)direct attention and risk perception. The volume's aim is to present an analysis of standardization processes and how it affects our thinking about risk, how we organize risk governance, and how standardization may influence risk management. In so doing, it contributes to a more informed discourse regarding the use of standards and standardization in contemporary risk management. Standardization and Risk Governance will be of great interest to students of risk, standardization, global governance, and critical security studies.

show abstract

Section: Norwegian Terrorism Management In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Security Is a Non-event With No Best Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Standardization and Risk Governance

Olsen¹,

Juhl²,

Lindøe³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The differences between safety and security are reflected by differences in the tools, standards and the way in which risk management is conducted in the two domains, especially during the risk-assessment phase (Jore and Egeli, 2015). Within the safety field a variety of risk-management tools have been developed and improved over many decades, while in the field of security there is no set of agreed upon best practices and risk-management tools available (Maal et al, 2017). Table I sums up the main aspects of the dissimilarities between safety and security.…”

Section: Risk Management Of Security Threats and Black Swansmentioning

confidence: 99%

The contribution of foresight to improve long-term security planning

Jore

Utland

Vatnamo

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Despite the common focus on studying future events, the study of risk management and foresight have developed as two segmented scientific fields. This study aims to investigate whether current risk management methodology is sufficient for long-term planning against threats from terrorism and other black swan events, and whether perspectives from foresight studies can contribute to more effective long-term security planning. Design/methodology/approach This study investigates the planning process of the rebuilding of the Norwegian Government Complex destroyed during a terrorist attack in 2011. The study examines whether security risk managers find current security risk management methodology sufficient for dealing with long-term security threats to the Norwegian Government Complex. Findings Current security risk management methodology for long-term security planning is insufficient to capture black swan events. Foresight perspectives could contribute by engaging tools to mitigate the risk of these events. This could lead to more robust security planning. Originality/value The main contribution of this paper is to investigate whether perspectives and methodology from foresight studies can improve current security risk management methodology for long-term planning and look for cross-fertilization between foresight and risk studies. A framework for scenario development based on security risk management methodology and foresight methodology is proposed that can help bridge the gap.

show abstract

“…In safety, the characteristics of the hazards are more accessible and the number of scenarios to be considered may also be restricted, but the hazard is still regarded as significant (Kriaa et al 2015). Although there are several international and national standards, guidelines and recommendations in textbooks and the scientific literature on how to conduct security risk assessment a literature review concluded that there does not exist a consensus on what is the best practice of conduction security risk analysis and different security risk concepts and management tools vary across countries and sectors (Maal et al 2017). Furthermore, in safety science there are currently ongoing debates in both academia and in the practical community about whether there is a need for a specific risk concept for security that can capture the special features of security risk, or whether perspectives dominating the safety field are adaptable to the security field (Amundrud et al 2017;Jore and Egeli 2015).…”

Section: How Is Security Different From Safety?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Conceptual and Scientific Demarcation of Security in Contrast to Safety

Jore

2017

Eur J Secur Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increased focus on protection from terrorism, espionage, cybersecurity and other malicious crimes has led to increased academic interest in the topic of security, especially in risk and safety studies. This article aims to investigate the conceptual and scientific demarcation of security in contrast to safety, and discuss the status of security as an independent science. Security is a multifaceted concept and academic definitions often distinguish security from safety in terms of intentionality. However, intentionality also plays a part in safety research thus this is not a sufficient parameter for distinguishing the two fields. The dichotomy of nonmalicious versus malicious is suggested as a means for differentiation. A new definition of security that incorporates elements associated with the current security research field is proposed. Security can be defined as the perceived or actual ability to prepare for, adapt to, withstand, and recover from dangers and crises caused by people's deliberate, intentional, and malicious acts such as terrorism, sabotage, organized crime, or hacking. The conclusion is that before security can be established as an independent discipline, it is necessary to determine what concepts and theories are related to the field, what levels of and objects in society should be included, in addition to the interrelationships and interdependencies with other disciplines.

show abstract

Methodology for security risk assessments—is there a best practice?

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Standardization and Risk Governance

Standardization and Risk Governance

The contribution of foresight to improve long-term security planning

The Conceptual and Scientific Demarcation of Security in Contrast to Safety

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About