Detlof von Winterfeldt

A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities

This paper presents a conceptual framework to define seismic resilience of communities and quantitative measures of resilience that can be useful for a coordinated research effort focusing on enhancing this resilience. This framework relies on the complementary measures of resilience: “Reduced failure probabilities,” “Reduced consequences from failures,” and “Reduced time to recovery.” The framework also includes quantitative measures of the “ends” of robustness and rapidity, and the “means” of resourcefulness and redundancy, and integrates those measures into the four dimensions of community resilience—technical, organizational, social, and economic—all of which can be used to quantify measures of resilience for various types of physical and organizational systems. Systems diagrams then establish the tasks required to achieve these objectives. This framework can be useful in future research to determine the resiliency of different units of analysis and systems, and to develop resiliency targets and detailed analytical procedures to generate these values.

Advances in decision analysis : from foundations to applications

Ch 3: The Foundations of Decision Analysis Revisited Citation: Howard RA. Chapter 3: The Foundations of Decision Analysis Revisited. Edwards W, Miles RF, von Winterfeldt D, eds. Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations to Applications. Cambridge University Press 2007: 32-56. http://www.cambridge.org/9780521863681 Ch 4: Decision Analysis: A Personal Account of How It Got Started and Evolved Citation: Raiffa H. Chapter 4: Decision Analysis: A Personal Account of How It Got Started and Evolved. Edwards W, Miles RF, von Winterfeldt D, eds. Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations to Applications. Cambridge University Press 2007: 57-70. http://www.cambridge.org/9780521863681

Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Terrorism Risk

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent establishment of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), considerable efforts have been made to estimate the risks of terrorism and the cost effectiveness of security policies to reduce these risks. DHS, industry, and the academic risk analysis communities have all invested heavily in the development of tools and approaches that can assist decisionmakers in effectively allocating limited resources across the vast array of potential investments that could mitigate risks from terrorism and other threats to the homeland. Decisionmakers demand models, analyses, and decision support that are useful for this task and based on the state of the art. Since terrorism risk analysis is new, no single method is likely to meet this challenge. In this article we explore a number of existing and potential approaches for terrorism risk analysis, focusing particularly on recent discussions regarding the applicability of probabilistic and decision analytic approaches to bioterrorism risks and the Bioterrorism Risk Assessment methodology used by the DHS and criticized by the National Academies and others.

Beyond acceptable risk: On the social acceptability of technologies

The social acceptability of large-scale technologies depends upon a wide range of things, some related to safety and economics, but also some factors of cultural, social and psychological significance. However, many risk analysts assume that public opposition to technologies is mostly due to unfounded fears of their risks and, that there can exist quantitative criteria of “acceptable risk” that could allow the acceptability of technologies to be judged. This paper traces the emergence of the “acceptable risk” problem formulation and reviews critically some of the approaches that have been put forward to “solve” it. It concludes by discussing the problem of acceptable technology returned to its wider political and cultural context.

Structuring decision problems for decision analysis

Abstract Structuring decision problems into a formally acceptable and manageable format is probably the most important step of decision analysis. Since presently no sound methodology for structuring exists, this step is still an art left to the intuition and craftsmanship of the individual analyst. After introducing a general concept of structuring, this paper reviews some recent advances in structuring research. These include taxonomies for problem identification and new tools such as influence diagrams and interpretative structural modeling. Two conclusions emerge from this review: structuring research is still limited to a few hierarchical concepts and it tends to ignore substantive problem aspects that delineate a problem it its real world context. Consequently structuring research has little to say about distinctions between typical problem classes such as regulation, siting, or budget allocation. As an alternative the concept of “prototypical decision analytic structures” is introduced. Such structures are developed to meet the substantive characteristics of a specific problem (e.g., siting a specific Liquid Natural Gas plant) but they are at the same time general enough to apply to similar problems (industrial facility siting). As an illustration, the development of a prototypical analytic structure for environmental standard setting is described. Finally, some typical problem classes are examined and some requirements for prototypical structures are discussed.

Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis

Behavioral decision research has demonstrated that judgments and decisions of ordinary people and experts are subject to numerous biases. Decision and risk analysis were designed to improve judgments and decisions and to overcome many of these biases. However, when eliciting model components and parameters from decisionmakers or experts, analysts often face the very biases they are trying to help overcome. When these inputs are biased they can seriously reduce the quality of the model and resulting analysis. Some of these biases are due to faulty cognitive processes; some are due to motivations for preferred analysis outcomes. This article identifies the cognitive and motivational biases that are relevant for decision and risk analysis because they can distort analysis inputs and are difficult to correct. We also review and provide guidance about the existing debiasing techniques to overcome these biases. In addition, we describe some biases that are less relevant because they can be corrected by using logic or decomposing the elicitation task. We conclude the article with an agenda for future research.

Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science

As part of the 50th anniversary ofManagement Science, the journal is publishing articles that reflect on the past, present, and future of the various subfields the journal represents. In this article, we consider decision analysis research as it has appeared inManagement Science. After reviewing the foundations of decision analysis and the history of the journals decision analysis department, we review a number of key developments in decision analysis research that have appeared inManagement Science and offer some comments on the current state of the field.

Communicating Scientific Information About Health and Environmental Risks: Problems and Opportunities from a Social and Behavioral Perspective

Risk communication takes place in a variety of forms, ranging from product warning labels on cigarette packages and saccharin bottles to interactions between officials and members of the public on such highly charged issues as Love Canal, AIDS, and the accident at Three Mile Island. Recent experience has shown that communicating scientific information about health and environmental risks can be exceedingly difficult and is often frustrating to those involved. Government officials, industry executives, and scientific experts often complain that laypeople do not understand technical risk information and that individual and media biases and limitations lead to distorted and inaccurate perceptions of many risk problems. Individual citizens and representatives of public groups are often equally frustrated, perceiving government and industry officials to be uninterested in their concerns, unwilling to take immediate and direct actions to solve seemingly simple and obvious health and environmental problems, and reluctant or unwilling to allow them to participate in decisions that intimately affect their lives. In this context, the media often play the role of transmitter and translator of information about health and environmental risks, but have been criticized for exaggerating risks and emphasizing drama over scientific facts.

Eliciting Subjective Probability Distributions on Continuous Variables

Abstract Five procedures for assessing subjective probability distributions over continuous variables were compared using almanac questions as stimuli. The procedures varied on the uncertainty measures used (probabilities, odds, and odds on a logarithmic scale) and the type of response required from the subjects (uncertainty measure or value of the unknown quantity). The results showed the often used fractile procedures were inferior to procedures requiring probabilities or odds as the response from subjects. The results are also discussed in terms of the “anchoring and adjustment” hypothesis.

Should We Protect Commercial Airplanes Against Surface-to-Air Missile Attacks by Terrorists?

This paper describes a decision tree analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of MANPADS (Man-Portable Air Defense Systems) countermeasures. These countermeasures are electronic devices that can be installed on commercial airplanes to detect and deflect surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) fired by terrorists. The model considers a terrorist attempt to shoot down a commercial airplane with a heat-seeking SAM, and it evaluates the decision to install countermeasures, taking into account alternative modes of attack, probabilities of success, and consequences to the economy. All model variables were fully parameterized, using reasonable ranges based on open-source literature. Not surprisingly, the probability of an attack, the consequences of an attack to the economy, and the cost of countermeasures are the most important parameters. Surprisingly, some of the hotly disputed parameters, such as the probability of an airplane surviving a successful hit or the probability of a false alarm, have very little impact on the results. The analysis suggests that MANPADS countermeasures installed on planes can be cost-effective if the probability of such an attack is large (greater than about 0.40 in ten years), the economic losses are large (greater than about