Protection from extreme events: using a socio-technological approach to evaluate policy options

Little, Richard; Weaver, Elise A.

doi:10.1504/ijem.2005.008739

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Buldyrev et al (2010) note that power and communications networks are simultaneously interdependent, as power networks rely on communications networks for coordination while the communications networks depend on electricity for their basic functioning. Understanding the impact of this simultaneous interdependency is a critical issue for infrastructure research; there is much to learn about the depth of the systems' interdependencies, and how failures in one system may propagate across other systems (Gao et al 2012, Little 2005.…”

Section: Critical Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

The Emergence of Global Systemic Risk

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we discuss the increasing interdependence of societies, focusing specifically on issues of systemic instability and fragility generated by the new and unprecedented level of connectedness and complexity resulting from globalization. We define the global system as a set of tightly coupled interactions that allow for the continued flow of information, capital, goods, services, and people. Using the general concepts of globality, complexity, networks, and the nature of risk, we analyze case studies of infrastructure, trade, finance, the environment, and epidemiology to develop empirical support for the concept of global systemic risk. We seek to identify and describe the sources and nature of such risks and methods of thinking about risks that may inform future academic research and policy-making decisions.

show abstract

Section: Critical Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

The Emergence of Global Systemic Risk

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The next step then, is to determine an appropriate threshold or cut-off point, such that a decision above the threshold would produce acceptable results within the limits or risk tolerance and one below it would not. Because no indicator is perfect, any "evacuate/don't evacuate" decision will result in some decisions to evacuate deemed correct when they are not (false positives) and some decisions not to evacuate deemed correct when they are not (false negatives) [18]. For example, on November 17, 2003, the Deep-Ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART) System in the Pacific Ocean detected a small tsunami generated by an earthquake near Adak, Alaska, but based on an assessment of data provided by DART buoys; no warning was issued for this event, which saved Hawaii an estimated $68 million.…”

Section: Figure 3 Components Of An End-to-end Tsunami Warning and MImentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-Technological Systems Integration to Support Tsunami Warning and Evacuation

Little

Wallace

Birkland

et al. 2007

2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On December 26, 2004, countries in the Indian Ocean basin were struck by a tsunami generated by a large magnitude earthquake just south of the western tip of Sumatra. Observations made during a post-tsunami visit to coastal Thailand suggest that the value of the proposed emergency warning system (EWS) for the Indian Ocean would be greatly enhanced if it was augmented by an on-shore cyber-based warning and evacuation system. Such a system would greatly increase safety with minimal disruption to the normal activities involved in tourism and other coastal industries. An integrated, cyber-based system to inform and assist the tsunami detection, warning, and evacuation process would, in essence, expand time and shorten distances. This paper describes the elements of such a cyber-infrastructure system, how system triggers could be calibrated using decision principles from judgment theory, and how the system could be tested through simulations employing agentbased models.

show abstract

Fairness in Technological Design

Shelley

2011

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses an important multi-disciplinary issue of current interest, that is, the implications of technological design for fairness. A visual, graphical methodology centered on the Taylor-Russell diagram is proposed to address this issue. The Taylor-Russell diagram helps to identify and explore ways in which predictions built into designs can pit the interests of different constituencies against one another. The configuration of the design represents a trade-off between the interests of the communities involved. Whether or not the trade-off is appropriate constitutes a problem of fairness or distributive justice. The breadth of this methodology is supported by a diversity of examples analyzed. These include a surveillance system, an automotive safety system, a civic information system, and the international food distribution system. These examples provide models for application of the methodology to the analysis of designs in further areas of concern. Limitations of the methodology are also discussed. While it helps to identify and clarify issues of fairness in technology design, the methodology does not provide a general theory of fairness, nor can it provide fair solutions to such issues without appeal to further principles or concepts.

show abstract

Protection from extreme events: using a socio-technological approach to evaluate policy options

Cited by 6 publications

References 12 publications

The Emergence of Global Systemic Risk

The Emergence of Global Systemic Risk

Socio-Technological Systems Integration to Support Tsunami Warning and Evacuation

Fairness in Technological Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About