Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33088026›Full record

ArticleReliability engineering & system safety2021

Globalization and global risk: How risk analysis needs to be enhanced to be effective in confronting current threats.

Terje Aven, Enrico Zio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. The Microfoundations of Organizational Risk.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Risk science and politics: What is and should be the relationship?Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Terje AvenUniversity of Stavanger, Norway.
Enrico ZioMINES ParisTech, PSL University, France, Politecnico di Milano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

CoronavirusGlobal riskResilienceRisk science

Identifiers

PMID33088026
PMCPMC7560382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.