ArticleReliability engineering & system safety2021
Globalization and global risk: How risk analysis needs to be enhanced to be effective in confronting current threats.
Article in Reliability engineering & system safety, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- High impact low probability events: research landscape and future opportunities.Natural hazards (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- The Microfoundations of Organizational Risk.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Local response to global risk: a case study of risk perception and communication on Chinese social media regarding Fukushima's treated radioactive water discharge.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Risk science and politics: What is and should be the relationship?Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Global South-led responsible AI solutions to strengthen health systems: an emergent research landscape.Oxford open digital health · 2025Article
- Research to Confront Climate Change Complexity: Intersectionality, Integration, and Innovative Governance.Earth's future · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last 20-30 years, technological innovation has enabled the advancement of industry at a global scale, giving rise to a truly global society, resting on an interdependent web of transnational technical, economic and social systems. These systems are exposed to scenarios of cascading outbreaks, whose impacts can ripple to very large scales through their strong interdependencies, as recently shown by the pandemic spreading of the Coronavirus. Considerable work has been conducted in recent years to develop frameworks to support the assessment, communication, management and governance of this type of risk, building on concepts like systemic risks, complexity theory, deep uncertainties, resilience engineering, adaptive management and black swans. Yet contemporary risk analysis struggles to provide authoritative societal guidance for adequately handling these types of risks, as clearly illustrated by the Coronavirus case. In this paper, we reflect on this situation. We aim to identify critical challenges in current frameworks of risk assessment and management and point to ways to strengthen these, to be better able to confront threats like the Coronavirus in the future. A set of principles and theses are established, which have the potential to support a common foundation for the many different scientific perspectives and 'schools' currently dealing with risk handling issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.