Red Track (C-31): Managing and Evaluating Risk

- Session Description (click to collapse)

Responding to climate change requires an iterative risk management process that includes both adaptation and mitigation and takes into account climate change damages, co-benefits, sustainability, equity, and attitudes to risk. Successful risk management will require collaboration among numerous health and policy communities to accurately identify and value risk and weigh potential responses. This session will explore the extent of agreement around comparative climate change-related health risks, identify key audiences that must be engaged to develop and deploy a robust risk management strategy, and explore possible tools for decision support to be used in educating these audiences.


 

- Moderator (click to collapse)


Glen Fountain

 

Glen Fountain received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from Kansas State University in 1965 and 1966 respectively, and joined the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in 1966.  During his early career he was a member of APL’s technical staff that developed a number of space missions for both the Department of Defense and NASA.  From 1974 on he has held a number of line and project management positions in APL’s Space Department.  He is currently the Project Manager of the New Horizons mission to Pluto which was launched in January 2006.  In 2007, Glen was presented the Von Braun Award for outstanding space program management by the AIAA and in 2008, the NASA Exceptional Achievement Award.

 

- Notes (click to collapse)

	diverse set of people with diverse needs
need for common definition 
question about the defintion of risk is a subset of risk management  
general observtion for opening the discussion. 
goals for session then the chart in the risk spectrum:
how to take the limited resources and portion it across a wide range --> allocation of resources 
risk decision making:
who does the risk analysis? economics brings awarness, science brings awarness and society uses the analysis to drive a decision.  
consensus on terms:
risk evaluation and risk managment with underlying elements
risk is dealth with defining options- at what level, who decides?

safety analysis is done similarly with the risk analysis in how one drives at the consequence.  
polling how to define risk and or relative importance in climate change 
creating another parameter that could be space and when and where it happens. 
parameters of scale, time, space reflects/impacts the risk and hence the consequences 
non-stationary issue 
span of control would need to be calculated in the decision making process
what would one consider under risk evaluation what else needs to be added into that
how do you communicate to the decion makers?  what influences the decision makers approach as the matter changes?  science gives basic info and the decision makers would have to step up.  science drives the issue without a given interest.  should the science be scaled to the action that can be made?  
decison makers under uncertainty--> climate outlook forum 
political elections influence the scientific knowledge-- therefore educating a group of people that dont know much about the topic.  focus on those who make policy decisions and there is a need for insurance companies to be engaged. 
there is a set of risk and threats that involves a group of decision makers, and it includes the personal experience  
risk from the perspective of public health --> would a decision made by a non-elected decision maker should be seen from vulnurability or risk?  
risk= consequence X likelihood
risk= hazard X vulnariblity and exposure 
any of these factors moving in a direction that can show a pattern --> impact on agriculture in africa.  ensuring that population can manage risk regardless of when the time comes.  
vulnurability and political capital are tied in.  hazard is modified by actions.  the risk will be modified by human action.  
in the US vulnurability = voters understanding the issue so it wont become an electoral issue. 
next slide risk evaluation:
examples of climate change risks and the question of: is there a common measure of risk to determine the allocation of resources across this risk spectrum?  
a given question could be framed differently hence making it a public health issue or economy??  the idea of creating the tool to be used, the problem is not linear.  disconnet between the scientist and the local policy maker is compounded with the problem of addressing the disease and climate health outcome.
the framing tool:
climate change was about mitigation and now it is about adaptation.  these models are not set for adaptation.  
how is the question need to be framed to include the empidemeolgy, climate and disease-->  different question and different appraoch.
how do you decide which are the most critical issues that have to be addressed first, primarily adaptation?
resource limitation is chronic amongst all public health practitioners.  addressing a linear problem is very different than addressing a fluid situation.  
conclusion:
need a way of framing the discussion --> publich health deals with vulunrability as being broadly seen.  vulnurability of the infrastructure across the climate change.  consequence to whom?  how the climate change influence the most vulnurable popultaion.  who is the constituent with limited voice?
vulnurabiity will be difined by the constituents than in general might have a different constituency-->the US not signing the KEYOTO
what is the most important next step in this conversation?   




 
 
 


Comments

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
illness, death, migration by Shay.Strong
Risk = by Madeleine.Thomson
Risk by Alpana.Kaushiva
risk definition by Steven.Babin
Risk = by Madeleine.Thomson
Please reply to this post by Shay.Strong
regional level (mayors, by Shay.Strong