ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2026
Applying the Bow Tie Method to Evaluate Emerging Risk: The Case of Carbon Capture and Water Stress.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging environmental risks are often shaped not by a lack of knowledge alone, but by fragmented information across systems, disciplines, and levels of governance. This fragmentation limits the ability of local decision-makers to identify and respond effectively to rapidly developing technologies. This paper introduces a novel bow tie risk assessment framework as a practical tool for identifying and organizing these risks. By integrating engineering, environmental, and policy perspectives, the approach captures interactions across land use, water systems, and governance structures. We apply the framework to carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) development in Colorado. Analysis shows that tracking how CCS, CCU, and CCUS are defined and applied across institutions reveals gaps in accountability, coordination, and risk identification. These inconsistencies contribute to policy drift, obscure system-level impacts, and limit stakeholder engagement. The bow tie framework makes these gaps visible, drawing attention to risks that remain hidden within fragmented knowledge and governance systems. Findings from the Colorado case study indicate that current CCUS governance lacks consistent mechanisms to define, measure, and account for water use and impacts across institutions. The analysis highlights a critical gap in how water is conceptualized and measured, particularly where it may be permanently removed or altered through subsurface injection, storage, or disposal in ways that do not align with conventional distinctions between consumptive and non-consumptive use. The method provides a practical tool for local and regional governments to identify risks, engage broader stakeholders, and support coordinated, interdisciplinary, and adaptive decision-making.
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.