Risk assessment and resilience of critical communication infrastructure in railways

Johnsen, Stig Ole; Veen, Mona

doi:10.1007/s10111-011-0187-2

Cited by 34 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Tveiten et al [39] locate complexity and risk in the increased distribution of oil and gas systems. Steen and Aven [53], Johnsen and Venn [54], as well as Owen et al [55] connect the need for a resilience approach to the intractable nature of risk in modern social-technological systems. Nemeth et al [40] operationalise this intractable nature through the notion of "gaps" in the continuity of flows when complex high-hazard systems (in their case healthcare) are operating outside of their normal conditions.…”

Section: Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review

Bergström

Winsen

Henriqson

2015

Reliability Engineering & System Safety

213

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience is becoming a prevalent agenda in safety research and organisational practice. In this study we examine how the peer-reviewed safety science literature (a) formulates the rationale behind the study of resilience; (b) constructs resilience as a scientific object; and (c) constructs and locates the resilient subject. The results suggest that resilience engineering scholars typically motivate the need for their studies by referring to the inherent complexities of modern sociotechnical systems; complexities that make these systems inherently risky. The object of resilience then becomes the capacity to adapt to such emerging risks in order to guarantee the success of the inherently risky system. In the material reviewed, the subject of resilience is typically the individual, either at the sharp end or at higher managerial levels. The individual is called-upon to adapt in the face of risk to secure the continuous performance of the system. Based on the results from how resilience has been introduced in safety sciences we raise three ethical questions for the field to address: (1) should resilience be seen as people thriving despite of, or because of, risk?; (2) should resilience theory form a basis for moral judgement?; and finally (3) how much should resilience be approached as a trait of the individual?

show abstract

Section: Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Venn [54] also suggest interventions at several organisational levels. Dekker and Pruchnicki [60] clearly offer a macro perspective, however, their paper does not provide examples or empirical data to support or further elaborate this approach.…”

Section: Resilience Located At a Functional Level Of The System (Micrmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review

Bergström

Winsen

Henriqson

2015

Reliability Engineering & System Safety

213

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…De nombreuses définitions de la résilience existent. Elles incluent généralement différentes capacités (Bruneau et al, 2003 ;Francis et Bekera, 2014 ;Johnsen et Veen, 2013 ;Labaka et al, 2016 ;Matzenberg et al, 2015 ;Rosati et al, 2015) : à réduire l'impact d'événements (Absorption ou Résistance), à minimiser le temps de récupération (Récupération) et à évoluer en développant des processus spécifiques (Adaptabilité). Au point de vue conceptuel, la résilience et le risque se rejoignent sur les aspects d'Absorption.…”

Section: Adaptabilitéunclassified

Résilience des infrastructures critiques : point de vue sur les approches actuelles

Curt¹,

Tacnet²,

Simon³

2016

Congrès Lambda Mu 20 De Maîtrise Des Risques Et De Sûreté De Fonctionnement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

En situation de crise, les systèmes, organisations et populations doivent réagir et faire face à des événements qui étaient intrinsèquement imprévisibles avant qu'ils ne se produisent : les fonctions sociétales vitales, et donc les infrastructures, doivent être restaurées ou adaptées aussi rapidement que possible. Cette capacité se rapporte à la résilience. Des progrès ont été faits au niveau de sa conceptualisation mais elle reste encore difficile à mesurer et à appliquer en pratique. Les résultats de cet article sont basés sur une étude bibliographique permettant deux types d'analyse des avancées actuelles dans le domaine de la résilience des infrastructures critiques : un examen du nombre de travaux publiés sur la thématique de la résilience des infrastructures et une étude présentant les limites des approches actuelles et des propositions de développement pour améliorer la gestion de la résilience des infrastructures. La communication (i) positionne la résilience par rapport à la gestion du risque ; (ii) identifie différentes dimensions de la résilience ; (iii) pointe les limites actuelles des systèmes d'évaluation et d'amélioration de la résilience ; (iv) propose deux types de développements qui pourraient répondre aux limites actuelles de la gestion de la résilience, sous réserve du respect d'un certain nombre de contraintes.

show abstract

“…Saurin and Carim Júnior (2011) reported from the development and testing of a resilience auditing framework addressing the individual, the team, and the organizational level. Aiming to enhance system resilience, Johnsen and Veen (2013) also suggested interventions at several organizational levels.…”

Section: Meso: Resilient Organizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the Macro and the Micro by Considering the Meso: Reflections on the Fractal Nature of Resilience

Bergström¹,

Dekker²

2014

E&S

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. We pursued the following three interconnected points: (1) there are unexplored opportunities for resilience scholars from different disciplines to cross-inspire and inform, (2) a systems perspective may enhance understanding of human resilience in health and social settings, and (3) resilience is often considered to be fractal, i.e., a phenomenon with recognizable or recurring features at a variety of scales. Following a consideration of resilience from a systems perspective, we explain how resilience can, for analytic purposes, be constructed at four scales: micro, meso, macro, and cross-scale. Adding to the cross-scale perspective of the social-ecological field, we have suggested an analytical framework for resilience studies of the health field, which incorporates holism and complexity by embracing an ecological model of cognition, something supported by empirical studies of organizations in crisis situations at various spatial as well as temporal scales.

show abstract

Risk assessment and resilience of critical communication infrastructure in railways

Cited by 34 publications

References 14 publications

On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review

On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review

Résilience des infrastructures critiques : point de vue sur les approches actuelles

Bridging the Macro and the Micro by Considering the Meso: Reflections on the Fractal Nature of Resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About