风险管理外文翻译

1、外文文献翻译译文一、外文原文 原文：Risk ManagementThis chapter reviews and discusses the basic issues and principles of risk management, including: risk acceptability (tolerability); risk reduction and the ALARP principle; cautionary and precautionary principles. And presents a case study showing the importance of t

2、hese issues and principles in a practical management context. Before we take a closer look, let us briefly address some basic features of risk management.The purpose of risk management is to ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect people, the environment, and assetsfrom possible harmful c

3、onsequencesof the activities being undertaken, as well as to balance different concerns, in particular risks and costs. Risk management includes measures both to avoid the hazards and to reduce their potential harm. Traditionally, in industries such as nuclear, oil, and gas, risk managementwas based

4、 on a prescriptive regulating regime, in which detailed requirements were set with regard to the design and operation of the arrangements. This regime has gradually been replaced by a more goal-oriented regime, putting emphasis on what to achieve rather than on the means of achieving it.Risk managem

5、ent is an integral aspect of a goal-oriented regime. It is acknowledged that risk cannot be eliminated but must be managed. There is nowadays an enormous drive and enthusiasm in various industries and in society as a whole to implement risk managementin organizations. There are high expectations tha

6、t risk management is the proper framework through which to achieve high levels of performance.Risk managementinvolves achieving an appropriate balance between realizing opportunities for gain and minimizing losses. It is an integral part of good management practice and an essential element of good c

7、orporate governance. It is aniterative process consisting of steps that, when undertaken in sequence, can lead to a continuous improvement in decision-making and facilitate a continuous improvement in performance.To support decision-making regarding design and operation, risk analyses are carried ou

8、t. They include the identification of hazards and threats, cause analyses, consequenceanalyses, and risk descriptions. The results are then evaluated. The totality of the analyses and the evaluations are referred to as risk assessments. Risk assessment is followed by risk treatment, which is a proce

9、ss involving the development and implementation of measures to modify the risk, including measures designed to avoid, reduce (“ optimizer, ”or )r,ettraainstfhee risk. Risk transfer meanssharing with another party the benefit or loss associatedwith a risk. It is typically affected through insurance.

10、Risk management covers all coordinated activities in the direction and control of an organization with regard to risk.In many enterprises, the risk management tasks are divided into three main categories: strategic risk, financial risk, and operational risk. Strategic risk includes aspects and facto

11、rs that are important for the enterprise -term strateg y asnldonpglans, for example mergers and acquisitions, technology, competition, political conditions, legislation and regulations, and labor market. Financial risk includes the enterprise financial situation, and includes: Market risk, associate

12、d with the costs of goods and services, foreign exchange rates and securities (shares, bonds, etc.). Credit risk, associatedwith a debtor fasilure to meet its obligations in accordancewith agreed terms. Liquidity risk, reflecting lack of access to cash; the difficulty of selling an asset in a timely

13、 manner. Operational risk is related to conditions affecting the normal operating situation: Accidental events, including failures and defects, quality deviations, natural disasters. Intended acts; sabotage, disgruntled employees, etc. Loss of competence, key personnel. Legal circumstances, associat

14、ed for instance, with defective contracts and liability insurance.For an enterprise to become successful in its implementation of risk management, top management needs to be involved, and activities must be put into effect on many levels. Some important points to ensure success are: the establishmen

15、t of a strategyfor risk management, i.e., the principles of how the enterprise defines and implements risk management. Should one simply follow the regulatory requirements (minimal requirements), or should one be the“ best in the class ” ? The establishment of a riskmanagement process for the enterp

16、rise, i.e. formal processesand routines that the enterprise is to follow. The establishment of management structures, with roles and responsibilities, such that the risk analysis process becomes integrated into the organization. The implementation of analyses and support systems, such as risk analys

17、is tools, recording systems for occurrences of various types of events, etc. The communication, training, and development of a risk management culture, so that the competence, understanding, and motivation level within the organization is enhanced.Given the above fundamentals of risk management, the

18、 next step is to develop principles and a methodology that can be used in practical decision-making. This is not, however, straightforward. There are a number of challenges and here we address some of these: establishing an informative risk picture for the various decision alternatives, using this r

19、isk picture in a decision-making context. Establishing an informative risk picture means identifying appropriate risk indices and assessments of uncertainties. Using the risk picture in a decision making context means the definition and application of risk acceptance criteria, cost benefit analyses

20、and the ALARP principle, which states that risk should be reduced to a level which is as low as is reasonably practicable.It is common to define and describe risks in terms of probabilities and expected values. This has, however, been challenged, since the probabilities and expected values can camou

21、flage uncertainties; the assigned probabilities are conditional on a number of assumptions and suppositions, and they depend on the background knowledge. Uncertainties are often hidden in this background knowledge, and restricting attention to the assigned probabilities can camouflage factors that c

22、ould produce surprising outcomes. By jumping directly into probabilities, important uncertainty aspects are easily truncated, and potential surprises may be left unconsidered.Let us, as an example, consider the risks, seen through the eyes of a risk analystin the 1970s, associated with future health

23、 problems for divers working on offshore petroleum projects. The analyst assigns a value to the probability that a diver would experience health problems (properly defined) during the coming 30 years due to the diving activities. Let us assume that a value of 1 % was assigned, a number based on the

24、knowledge available at that time. There are no strong indications that the divers will experience health problems, but we know today that these probabilities led to poor predictions. Many divers have experienced severe health problems (Avon and Vine, 2007). By restricting risk to the probability ass

25、ignments alone, important aspects of uncertainty and risk are hidden. There is a lack of understanding about the underlying phenomena,but the probability assignments alone are not able to fully describe this status.Several risk perspectives and definitions have been proposed in line with this realiz

26、ation. For example, Avon (2007a, 2008a) defines risk as the two-dimensional combination of events/consequencesand associated uncertainties (will the events occur, what the consequences will be). A closely related perspective is suggested by Avon and Renan (2008a), who define risk associated with an

27、activity as uncertainty about and severity of the consequencesof the activity, where severity refers to intensity, size, extension, scope and other potential measures of magnitude with respect to something that humans value (lives, the environment, money, etc.). Losses and gains, expressed for examp

28、le in monetary terms or as the number of fatalities, are ways of defining the severity of the consequences.See also Avon and Christensen (2005).In the case of large uncertainties, risk assessments can support decision-making, but other principles, measures, and instruments are also required, such as

29、 the cautionary/precautionary principles as well as robustness and resilience strategies. An informative decision basis is needed, but it should be far more nuanced than can be obtained by a probabilistic analysis alone. This has been stressed by many researchers, e.g. Apostolicism (1990) and Aposto

30、licism and Lemon (2005): qualitative risk analysis (QRA) results are never the sole basis for decision-making. Safety- and security-related decision-making is risk-informed, not risk-based. This conclusion isnot, however, justified merely by referring to the need for addressing uncertainties beyond

31、probabilities and expected values. The main issue here is the fact that risks need to be balanced with other concerns.When various solutions and measures are to be compared and a decision is to be made, the analysis and assessments that have been conducted provide a basis for such a decision. In man

32、y cases, established design principles and standards provide clear guidance. Compliance with such principles and standards must be among the first reference points when assessingrisks. It is common thinking that risk management processes, and especially ALARP processes, require formal guidelines or

33、criteria (e.g., risk acceptance criteria and cost-effectiveness indices) to simplify the decision-making. Care must; however, be shown when using this type of formal decision-making criteria, as they easily result in a mechanization of the decision-making process. Such mechanization is unfortunate b

34、ecause: Decision-making criteria based on risk-related numbers alone (probabilities and expected values) do not capture all the aspects of risk, costs, and benefits, no method has a precision that justifies a mechanical decision based on whether the result is over or below a numerical criterion. It

35、is a managerial responsibility to make decisions under uncertainty, and management should be aware of the relevant risks and uncertainties.Apostolicism and Lemon (2005) adopt a pragmatic approach to risk analysis and risk management, acknowledging the difficulties of determining the probabilities of

36、 an attack. Ideally, they would like to implement a risk-informed procedure, based on expected values. However, since such an approach would require the use of probabilities that have not been “ rigorously derived, they ”see themselves forced to resort to a more pragmatic approach.This is one possib

37、le approach when facing problems of large uncertainties. The risk analyses simply do not provide a sufficiently solid basis for the decision-making process. We argue along the same lines. There is a need for a management review and judgment process. It is necessary to see beyond the computed risk pi

38、cture in the form of the probabilities and expected values. Traditional quantitative risk analyses fail inthis respect. We acknowledge the need for analyzing risk, but question the value added by performing traditional quantitative risk analyses in the case of large uncertainties. The arbitrariness

39、in the numbers produced can be significant, due to the uncertainties in the estimates or as a result of the uncertainty assessmentsbeing strongly dependent on the analysts.It should be acknowledged that risk cannot be accurately expressed using probabilities and expected values. A quantitative risk

40、analysis is in many cases better replaced by a more qualitative approach, as shown in the examples above; an approach which may be referred to as a semi-quantitative approach. Quantifying risk using risk indices such as the expected number of fatalities gives an impression that risk can be expressed

41、 in a very precise way. However, in most cases, the arbitrariness is large. In a semi-quantitative approach this is acknowledged by providing a more nuanced risk picture, which includes factors that can cause“ surpritshes ” relative toprobabilities and the expected values. Quantification often requi

42、res strong simplifications and assumptions and, as a result, important factors could be ignored or given too little (or too much) weight. In a qualitative or semi-quantitative analysis, a more comprehensive risk picture can be established, taking into account underlying factors influencing risk. In

43、contrast to the prevailing use of quantitative risk analyses, the precision level of the risk description is in line with the accuracy of the risk analysis tools. In addition, risk quantification is very resource demanding. One needs to ask whether the resources are used in the best way. We conclude

44、 that in many cases more is gained by opening up the way to a broader, more qualitative approach, which allows for considerations beyond the probabilities and expected values.The traditional quantitative risk assessments as seen for example in the nuclear and the oil & gas industries provide a r

45、ather narrow risk picture, through calculated probabilities and expected values, and we conclude that this approach should be used with care for problems with large uncertainties. Alternative approaches highlighting the qualitative aspects are more appropriate in such cases. A broad risk description

46、 is required. This is also the case in the normative ambiguity situations, as the risk characterizations provide a basis for the risk evaluation processes. The main concernis the value judgments, but they should be supported by solid scientific assessments, showing a broad risk picture. If one tries

47、 to demonstrate that it is rational to accept risk, on a scientific basis, too narrow an approach to risk has been adopted. Recognizing uncertainty as a main component of risk is essential to successfully implement risk management, for cases of large uncertainties and normative ambiguity.A risk desc

48、ription should cover computed probabilities and expected values, as well as: Sensitivities showing how the risk indices depend on the background knowledge (assumptions and suppositions); Uncertainty assessmentsD; escription of the background knowledge, including models and data used.The uncertainty

49、assessmentsshould not be restricted to standard probabilistic analysis, as this analysis could hide important uncertainty factors. The search for quantitative, explicit approachesfor expressing the uncertainties, even beyond the subjective probabilities, may seem to be a possible way forward. Howeve

50、r, such an approach is not recommended. Trying to be precise and to accurately express what is extremely uncertain does not make sense. Instead we recommend a more open qualitative approach to reveal such uncertainties. Some might consider this to be less attractive from a methodological and scienti

51、fic point of view. Perhapsit is, but it would be more suited for solving the problem at hand, which is about the analysis and management of risk and uncertainties.Source: Terje Aven. 2010.“ Risk Management ” . Risk in Technological Sys, tems, Octp175-198.二、翻译文章 译文：风险管理本章回顾和讨论风险管理的基本问题和原则，包括： 风险可接受性(

52、耐受性)、风险削减和安全风险管理原则、警示和预防原则，并提出了一个研究案例，说明在实际管理环境中这些问题和原则的重要性。 这需要我们的深入研究，在此之前， 让我们简单谈谈风险管理的一些基本特征。风险管理的目的是：在现时事件产生有害后果时，及时采取适当的措施以确 保人类，环境和资产的安全，以及平衡人们的不同关注取向，特别是风险和成本。 风险管理包括两种措施，控制危险源和减少潜在的危害。传统上，诸如核能，石 油和天然气产业，风险管理主要是依靠规范监管制度来管理的， 这项制度对设计 和操作的安排提出了系统性的要求。 但是渐渐的，这一制度已被一项更加标准化 的制度所取代，此制度是强调要取得的成果而不是

53、如何实现这些成果的手段。风险管理是标准化制度的一个组成部分。风险不能消除，只能加以控制改善， 这是被人们所公认的。现在有一项具有巨大驱动力和感召力的措施正应运而生， 它将不同产业和社会作为一个整体来实施组织风险管理。风险管理是一项适当的 措施，人们对于用它来实现高产值有很大的期望。风险管理包括可认识到的实现增益的机会和损失的最小化，并且在它们之间实现适当的平衡。这是一个组织构成良好有效的管理实践的基本要素。 这是一个 由递进步骤组成的反复的过程，按顺序进行时，能不断提高决策正确性并且促进 产值的不断增长。为了支持决策方面的设计和操作，需要进行风险分析。它们包括危害物和威 胁识别，成因分析，结果

54、分析和风险描述鉴定，然后评估结果。所有的分析和评 估将被作为风险评估。其次是风险评估的处理办法，这是一个过程，涉及开发和 实施措施来缓和风险，措施包括避免，减少（“优化”），转移或保留风险。风险 转移意味着与另一方共同享有利益或承担由于损失造成的风险。 它最典型的是受 保险的影响。风险管理涵盖了所有协调活动的方向目标和风险组织。在许多企业中，风险管理的任务分为三大类：战略风险，财务风险和经营风 险。战略风险包括对于企业的长期战略和计划起重要作用的方面和因素，例如兼并和收购，技术，竞争，政治环境，法律和法规，以及劳工市场。财务风险包括 影响企业财务状况的因素，包括：市场风险，商品和服务，外汇汇率

55、和证券的相 关成本（股票，债权等）；信用风险，与债务人没有按照其约定的有关条款履行 义务；流动性风险，反映现金缺乏时，及时出售资产的困难。操作风险是有关条 件影响正常工作的情况：意外的事件，包括故障和缺陷，质量差，自然灾害；预期行为，破坏，心怀不满的雇员等；丧失竞争力，关键人员；与法律环境下相关的，例如有缺陷合同及责任保险。一个企业要成功实施风险管理，需要高层管理人员参与，活动必须落实在许多层面上。确保成功的要点是一个风险管理战略的确立，例如企业如何定义和实施风险管理的原则。难道仅仅只需遵照监管要求（最低要求），或追求“成为最好的” ？企业风险管理过程的建立，包括企业贯彻的正式流程和常规。建立

56、管理结构，包括角色和责任分配，这样，风险分析过程和组织融为一体。分析和支持系统的实施，如风险工具分析，执行， 记录系统各种类型的事件的发生等。沟通，培训和发展风险管理文化，这样，组织的能力，理解和动机水平得到增强。实施了上述风险管理的基础原则后，下一步是制定可用于实际决策中的原则和方法。然而，这并不是那么简单，还有一系列的挑战，在这里我们列举其中一些：为不同的风险选择建立一个丰富的风险信息平台，将其运用到风险决策环境中。这意味着正确认识不确定因素的风险指数和风险评估。在风险决策方面则意味着接受风险的定义和准则，成本效益分析和安全风险管理原则，风险应该降低到实际合理的最低水平。定义和描述关于风险

57、的概率和预期性价值是常见的现象。然而， 这受到了挑战， 因为概率和预期值的不确定性是隐蔽的。概率的分配都是有条件的基于数量的简单假设和推测，他们依据的是背景知识。不确定性往往是隐藏在这个背景知识后面， 注意限制性是由于给定的概率而产生的，这些因素的隐蔽性可能产生令人惊讶的结果。直接考虑到了重要的不确定性因素容易被阻隔的可能性，而潜在的惊喜可能会是你不曾考虑到的。让我们举一个例子，通过 20 世纪 70 年代风险分析师分析海上石油项目工作的有关潜水员未来健康的问题来考虑风险。该分析师对潜水员在未来30 年中将经历的由于潜水活动而产生的健康问题（正确的定义）分配一个价值概率。让我们假设1%的价值被

58、分配，以当时的知识为基础是合适的。没有强烈的迹象表明潜水员会遇到健康问题，但在今天我们知道这些概率导致了较少的预测。许多潜水员们已出现了严重的健康问题（ Avon 和 Vine， 2007） 。 通过限制单独作业风险的概率，不确定性和风险的重要方面被隐藏了。由于对深层次的现象缺乏了解，单独作业的概率不能充分描述这种状态。一些危险的观点和定义已被提出并且已被证实符合这个现实。例如，Avon（2007a, 2008a）把风险定义为事件/后果和相关不确定性的二维组合（将发生的事件，后果将是什么）。Avon和Renan （2008a）建议从一个密切相关的角度将风险定义为有关不确定性活动及其产生的严重后

59、果，其严重性是指强度，大小，扩展，范围和其他潜在的关于人类价值（生活，环境，金钱等）的大小措施。损失和收益，例如以货币形式或死亡人数表述的，是界定后果的严重程度的方法。另见 Avon 和 Christensen （ 2005）。在具有较大不确定性的情况下，风险评估可以支持决策，但其他原则，措施和手段也需要，如警示、预防原则，以及鲁棒性和弹性战略。决策依据的信息是必要的， 但应比单独通过概率分析所得到的更加细微化。这一点被许多研究者所强调，如Apostolicism （ 1990）和Apostolicism 与 Lemon（ 2005）：定性分析（ QRA） 的结果永远不是决策的唯一基础。安全和与安全相关的决策是风险告