m (Scipediacontent moved page Draft Content 610309481 to Xing Zio 2016a) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
== Abstract == | == Abstract == | ||
| − | International audience | + | International audience; Business continuity of critical infrastructures (CIs) is exposed to various hazards including random failures, malicious threats, natural disasters and human errors, which could generate accidents with serious consequences (fatality, injury, environmental damage, business interruption and company reputation loss). We conceptualize the business continuity management (BCM) process as the integration of four active stages: prevention, mitigation, emergency and recovery. Integrated assessment and management is needed on all stages. On the contrary, the current approaches of BCM have not considered all phases in an integrated man-ner. We propose a new framework, which stands on an extension of the Bow-Tie model, to efficiently and effectively prevent and mitigate the potential consequences of an accident by properly designing and strengthening safety barriers for preventing and mitigating accidents, and making safety decisions for emer-gency and recovery. The proposed framework allows considering safety barriers and decisions in an integrated way. For operationalization, we explore the use of two complementary quantitative methods, Bayesian Network (BN) and Constraint Goal Method. BN takes the “negative” viewpoint of failure to determine the causes which lead to the final damage. CGM employs the positive perspective of the goal achievement process. An oil pipeline system is considered to show the application of the proposed approaches. |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| Line 15: | Line 10: | ||
* [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf] | * [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf] | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/pdf/10.1201/9781315374987-85 http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/pdf/10.1201/9781315374987-85], | ||
| + | : [http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781315374987-85 http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781315374987-85] | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321], | ||
| + | : [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/document https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/document], | ||
| + | : [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/file/xinaif%20.pdf] | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/document https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321/document], | ||
| + | : [https://www.scipedia.com/public/Xing_Zio_2016a https://www.scipedia.com/public/Xing_Zio_2016a], | ||
| + | : [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01411321], | ||
| + | : [https://re.public.polimi.it/handle/11311/1020929 https://re.public.polimi.it/handle/11311/1020929], | ||
| + | : [https://academic.microsoft.com/#/detail/2589071791 https://academic.microsoft.com/#/detail/2589071791] | ||
Latest revision as of 21:09, 28 January 2021
Abstract
International audience; Business continuity of critical infrastructures (CIs) is exposed to various hazards including random failures, malicious threats, natural disasters and human errors, which could generate accidents with serious consequences (fatality, injury, environmental damage, business interruption and company reputation loss). We conceptualize the business continuity management (BCM) process as the integration of four active stages: prevention, mitigation, emergency and recovery. Integrated assessment and management is needed on all stages. On the contrary, the current approaches of BCM have not considered all phases in an integrated man-ner. We propose a new framework, which stands on an extension of the Bow-Tie model, to efficiently and effectively prevent and mitigate the potential consequences of an accident by properly designing and strengthening safety barriers for preventing and mitigating accidents, and making safety decisions for emer-gency and recovery. The proposed framework allows considering safety barriers and decisions in an integrated way. For operationalization, we explore the use of two complementary quantitative methods, Bayesian Network (BN) and Constraint Goal Method. BN takes the “negative” viewpoint of failure to determine the causes which lead to the final damage. CGM employs the positive perspective of the goal achievement process. An oil pipeline system is considered to show the application of the proposed approaches.
Original document
The different versions of the original document can be found in:
Document information
Published on 01/01/2016
Volume 2016, 2016
DOI: 10.1201/9781315374987-85
Licence: CC BY-NC-SA license
Share this document
Keywords
claim authorship
Are you one of the authors of this document?