Risk analysis and management according to Russian and international safety standards
https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2023-2-336-347
Abstract
The paper analyzes the safety aspects outlined in national standards. The considered normative documentation answers the question of how to achieve acceptable risk levels. The basic concepts of risk assessment are presented. Positive changes in Russian safety standards are noted. There is no unified code in the legislation of the Russian Federation on environmental issues: there are federal laws, codes on certain environmental areas, as well as bylaws and legal acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Federal Law No. 7 “On Environmental Protection” should be mentioned among the main laws related to the regulation of environmental safety in construction. However, this law regulates the employer's leadership rather than their responsibility. The use of certain fines and penalties seems quite reasonable within the framework of improving environmental audit and management. At the same time, the international standard ISO 14001:2015 is aimed at forming a responsible attitude toward the ecosystem and natural resources as the most important asset of economic activity, rather than at specifying the need for managers to demonstrate leadership qualities as the main factor of environmental safety. As a result, risk analysts cannot be fully guided by the standards because they are not aligned with the universal international standard ISO 31000:2018, which creates a significant problem. An approach to risk assessment that describes the interaction of different scenarios should be developed, which will provide an increased ecological and economic effect.
About the Author
E. E. Smirnova
Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Elena E. Smirnova - Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Technosphere Security.
4 Vt. Krasnoarmejskaja St., Saint Petersburg 190005
Competing Interests:
The author declares no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article
References
1. Crispin G. The essence of risk identification in project risk management: An overview. International Journal of Science and Research. 2020;9(2):1553-1557. https://doi.org/10.21275/SR20215023033.
2. Gallop D., Willy C., Bischoff J. How to catch a black swan: Measuring the benefits of the premortem technique for risk identification. Journal of Enterprise Transformation. 2016;6(2):87-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/19488289.2016.1240118.
3. Rausand M., Haugen S. Risk assessment: Theory, methods, and applications. London: Wiley; 2020. 784 p.
4. Matuszak-Flejszman A., Paliwoda B. Influence of the Implemented Management Systems on Risk-Based Thinking in Organizations – A Review. In: Proceedings of the 36th International Business Information Management Association (IBIMA). Cordoba: IBIMA; 2022. p. 6644-6651.
5. de Melo F.J. C, de Medeiros D.D. Applying interpretive structural modeling to analyze the fundamental concepts of the management excellence model guided by the risk-based thinking of ISO 9001:2015. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal. 2020;27:742-772. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2020.1752144.
6. Link S., Naveh E. Standardization and discretion does the environmental standard ISO 14001 lead to performance benefits? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2016;53(4):508-519. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2006.883704.
7. Kushnin B.A., Furta S.D., Lyakin A.Y., Golembiovskaya D.S., Zhuravlev M.A. Comparison of russian national standard “Risk management. Principles and guidelines” Releases (GOST R ISO 31000:2019 and GOST R ISO 31000:2010), taking into account primary sources. Strategicheskie resheniya i riskmenedzhment = Strategic Decisions and Risk Management. 2022;13(2):134-150. (In Russ.). EDN: IDRNNK. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X2022-2-134-150.
8. Smirnova O.P., Vavilova M.A.2. Features of the implementation of the environmental management system in industry. Estestvenno-gumanitarnye issledovaniya. 2022;39:303-308. (In Russ.). EDN: FQREAV. https://doi.org/10.24412/23094788-2022-1-39-303-308.
9. Burdonov A.E., Shpakov A.S. The main problems on the way of introduction of environmental management in the Russian Federation. Ekonomika i ekologicheskii menedzhment = Economics and Environmental Management. 2019;1:154-162. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17586/2310-11722019-12-1-154-162.
10. Gadzhiev N.G., Konovalenko S.A., Trofimov M.N., Gadzhiev A.N. The role and significance of environmental safety in the system of ensuring the state's economic security. Yug Rossii: ekologiya, razvitie = South of Russia: ecology, development. 2021;16(3):200-214. (In Russ.). EDN: URGMOB. https://doi.org/18470/1992-1098-2021-3-200-214.
11. Novikova E.V. The Environmental and legal regulation on the green economy development stage in Russia. Ekologicheskoe pravo. 2020;4:9-16. (In Russ.). EDN: FUBAMJ. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3775-2020-4-9-16.
12. Smirnova E. Environmental risk analysis in construction under uncertainty. In: Reconstruction and restoration of architectural heritage. S. Sementsov, A. Leontyev, S. Huerta, I. Menéndez Pidal de Nava (eds.). London: CRC Press; 2020. p. 222–227. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003129097-47.
13. Larionov A., Nezhnikova E., Smirnova E. Risk assessment models to improve environmental safety in the field of the economy and organization of construction: A case study of Russia. Sustainability. 2021;13(24):13539. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413539.
14. Andersen T.J., Young P.C. Strategic risk leadership: Engaging a world of risk, uncertainty, and the unknown. Abingdon: Routledge; 2020. 164 p.
15. Jones A. Risk, opportunity, uncertainty and other random models. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2019. 316 р.
16. Smirnova E., Mamedov S., Shkarovskiy A. Improving the environmental safety risk assessment in construction using statistical analysis methods. Rocznik Ochrona Srodowiska. 2022;24:110-128. https://doi.org/10.54740/ros.2022.009.
17. Furr N., Furr S.H. The upside of uncertainty: A guide to finding possibility in the unknown. La Vergne: Harvard Business Review Press; 2022. 321 p.
18. Pashkevich M.A., Bykova M.V. Improvability of measurement accuracy in determining the level of soil contamination with petroleum products. Gornyi informatsionno-analiticheskii byulleten' (nauchnotekhnicheskii zhurnal) = Mining informational and analytical bulletin (scientific and technical journal). 2022;4:67-86. (In Russ.). EDN: WXCTEH. https://doi.org/10.25018/0236_1493_2022_4_0_67
19. Khokhryakov I.V., Rybnikov P.A., Tsey tlin E.M., Konovalov I.V. Integrated environmental risk index in justification of nature-oriented decision-making under uncertainty: a case-study of liquid industrial storage. Gornyi informatsionnoanaliticheskii byulleten' (nauchno-tekhnicheskii zhurnal) = Mining informational and analytical bulletin (scientific and technical journal). 2021;111:71-89. (In Russ.). EDN: PLGTNY. https://doi.org/10.25018/0236_1493_2021_111_0_71.
20. Smirnova E. Monte Carlo simulation of environmental risks of technogenic impact. In: E. Rybnov, P. Akimov, M. Khalvashi, E. Vardanyan (eds.). Contemporary problems of architecture and construction. London: CRC Press, 2021. P. 355– 360. https://doi.org/ 10.1201/9781003176428-69.
Review
For citations:
Smirnova E.E. Risk analysis and management according to Russian and international safety standards. Izvestiya vuzov. Investitsii. Stroitelstvo. Nedvizhimost. 2023;13(2):336-347. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21285/2227-2917-2023-2-336-347
Views:
130
Email this article 