GCRI · مدیریت ریسک سامانه‌ای
روش‌های کمی و کیفی
ارزیابی ریسک uses numbers where data support them and structured judgement where they do not. Probabilistic models, loss distributions, استنباط کارشناسی, bow-tie diagrams and risk matrices each answer different questions and fail in different ways. This page sets out how the main methods work, when each is fit for purpose, and how combining them keeps an assessment honest about what is known and what is assumed.
Quantitative and qualitative methods on the record.
Quantitative and qualitative methods: how the risk develops.
Probability, uncertainty and judgement. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Models need data that fit
Frequency and severity models work where events are numerous and recorded consistently. For rare, novel or changing risks the data are thin, and a precise-looking number can carry more assumption than evidence.
Judgement carries biases
Experts anchor on recent events, overestimate their own precision and converge in groups. Structured elicitation reduces these effects by separating estimates, asking for ranges and scoring calibration.
Matrices compress information
Likelihood and consequence matrices are quick to use, but they rank risks coarsely, can reverse orderings and hide correlated losses. They suit screening, and need other methods before a major decision.
Methods combine through structure
Fault trees, event trees and bow-tie diagrams link causes, controls and consequences. They provide a frame into which quantitative estimates and expert judgement can be placed and checked.
Cascade and stress lab.
The screen a team would use to follow this subject: its measures, states and decisions. Names are examples and values are illustrative.
Cascade and stress lab
Quantitative and qualitative methods · National system · Scenario SC-40
Interdependency graph
red: failed in scenario
Cascade sequence
- T+0HAZHeatwave and drought
- T+6hENGThermal plant derated, cooling water
- T+9hICTData centre on backup power
- T+14hWATPumping reduced, pressure loss
- T+20hHLTHospital water supply at risk
Service loss by system
Methods must be fit for risks that cross domains.
- آبپیوستگیHydrological risk is mostly quantified with simulation and extreme value statistics.What to watchUncertainty ranges reported with return periods
- سلامتپیوستگیEpidemic risk combines transmission models with expert judgement early in outbreaks.What to watchStructured elicitation records
- تنوع زیستیپیوستگیEcosystem risks often have qualitative evidence only, which matrices flatten.What to watchQualitative evidence kept as such
Method comparisons are designed for the مجموعهٔ روش‌ها و فنی. Cox showed in 2008 that risk matrices can rank risks inconsistently; the page sets out when quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative methods each fit.
- Comparisons of assessment techniques applied to the same risk.
- Cases where a ماتریس ریسک misled a decision.
How quantitative and qualitative methods is modelled, measured and tested.
مدل، مفروضات، داده‌ها و عدم قطعیت آن، به شکلی که دانشمند یا مهندس بررسی می‌کند. ساختارها از روش‌های منتشرشده پیروی می‌کنند. مقادیر ترسیم‌شده تبیینی‌اند، نه یافته.
مدل، معادلات و مفروضات
The model structure used for quantitative and qualitative methods, the assumptions it makes and how each is tested.
Ri = f(Hi, Ei, Vi, Ci)مخاطره، مواجهه، آسیب‌پذیری و ظرفیت مقابلهEAL = ∑k pk · Lkبر رویدادهای k با احتمال سالانهٔ pkxt+1 = A xt + B ut + εtA carries the couplings, u the shock, ε the error| فرض | چرا ساخته می‌شود | چگونه آزموده می‌شود |
|---|---|---|
| مخاطره و مواجهه در یک رویداد مستقل‌اند | انتگرال زیان را تحت‌کنترل نگه می‌دارد | مقایسه با برازش مفصل بر سوابق مشترک |
| جفت‌شدگی‌ها نزدیک نقطهٔ کار خطی‌اند | اجازه می‌دهد شوک‌ها از طریق A منتشر شوند | فراتر از دامنهٔ خطی آشفته کنید و مقایسه کنید |
| منحنی‌های آسیب‌پذیری میان مکان‌ها منتقل می‌شوند | منحنی‌های محلی به‌ندرت در دسترس‌اند | اعتبارسنجی در برابر زیان‌های مشاهده‌شده در جاهایی که وجود دارند |
- ورودی‌ها
- مجموعه‌داده‌های نسخه‌دار با خاستگاه
- خروجی‌ها
- توزیع‌ها، هرگز تک‌رقم‌ها
- کد
- منتشرشده با کارت مدل و آزمون‌ها
- بازتولید
- همان داده، کد، محیط و بذر
What is measured, and how well.
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | دورهٔ تکرار | Source type | برچسب |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risks assessed with quantitative estimates | percent of principal risks | annual | Assessment records | گزارش‌شده |
| Calibration of expert estimates | calibration score on seed questions | per elicitation | Structured expert judgement records | مشاهده‌شده |
| Loss event records | count of events with cause and amount recorded | continuous | Internal loss databases | مشاهده‌شده |
| Assessment uncertainty range | ratio of upper to lower bound | per assessment | Assessment outputs | برآوردشده |
| Controls with tested effectiveness | percent of key controls | annual | Control testing records | گزارش‌شده |
| Method documentation completeness | percent of assessments with method, data and assumptions recorded | annual | Assessment files | گزارش‌شده |
Where the evidence comes from.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| منبع | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| فنون ارزیابی ریسک در IEC 31010 | Descriptions, strengths and limits of more than forty techniques | Licensed standard, purchase required |
| پایگاه دادهٔ بین‌المللی سوانح EM-DAT (CRED، UCLouvain) | Disaster events with human and economic impacts | Free for non-commercial use with registration |
| چارچوب سندای Monitor and national disaster loss databases | Published reporting of disaster losses against Sendai targets | Public, UN terms of use |
| TU Delft expert judgement database | Past structured expert judgement studies with calibration data | Licence to check |
| Published operational loss data consortia summaries | Aggregate operational loss patterns in financial services | Members only; public summaries (to check) |
Who decides, and what the evidence serves.
ریسک سامانه‌ای Management prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| چه کسی تصمیم می‌گیرد | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Risk functions and analysts | Which method fits a given risk and decision | Method selection guides; documentation standards |
| Boards and executives | How much confidence to place in an assessment before acting on it | Uncertainty ranges; method documentation; calibration records |
| Regulators and supervisors | Whether an institution’s risk models are fit for the use made of them | Model documentation; validation and back-testing evidence |
Outputs this topic produces
- Method selection guides keyed to the question and the evidence available
- Structured استنباط کارشناسی protocols with calibration
- Bow-tie and fault-tree templates linked to registers
- Assessment files that record data, assumptions and ranges
What methods experts ask.
- Is there enough relevant data to estimate probabilities, or would numbers convey a false sense of precision?
- What kind of uncertainty dominates: randomness, lack of knowledge, or disagreement about how the system works?
- How sensitive is the decision to the parts of the analysis that are least certain?
- How can expert judgement be elicited so that it is transparent and less prone to bias?
Kinds of uncertainty.
Randomness
Natural variability that persists even with perfect knowledge, such as weather from year to year. Probability handles it well.
Lack of knowledge
Uncertainty that more data or research could reduce. It should be shown, not hidden in a single number.
Disputed structure
Where experts disagree on models, probabilities or values. Scenarios and robust decision methods suit it better.
A toolkit, matched to the problem.
- 01
Statistical and probabilistic models
Frequency analysis, extreme value methods and Bayesian inference from احتمال و آمار. Limits: rare events are poorly sampled, and past data may not reflect a changing system.
- 02
کمّی‌سازی عدم قطعیت
کمّی‌سازی عدم قطعیت و اعتبارسنجی مدل propagates input uncertainty through models and tests them against data. Limits: it cannot capture what the model leaves out.
- 03
قضاوت ساختاریافتهٔ خبرگان
Formal elicitation protocols that calibrate and combine expert views. Limits: time-consuming, and experts share blind spots.
- 04
Qualitative assessment
Scales, matrices and narrative analysis. Useful for communication and screening, but risk matrices can rank risks inconsistently and should not be the only tool.
How it is studied, and what the methods cannot say.
- 01احتمال و آمارFrequency and severity modelling · Dependence between risks · Combining data and judgementApplied here
- 02کمّی‌سازی عدم قطعیت و اعتبارسنجی مدلPropagating input uncertainty · Separating kinds of uncertainty · Deep uncertainty framingApplied here
- 03تحلیل تصمیم در شرایط عدم قطعیتMulti-criteria treatment choice · Decision trees for contingent plansApplied here
- 04طراحی سناریو و آزمون تنشCross-sector scenario design · Reverse stress testing · Second-round effectsApplied here
Where this page’s references lead.
نهادها و اسنادی که این صفحه بر پایهٔ آن‌ها خوانده می‌شود. وضعیت و ویراست‌ها تغییر می‌کنند؛ هر پیوند به نهاد صادرکننده می‌رود.
پرسش و پاسخ.
Are risk matrices reliable?
What is structured expert judgement?
When should risk be quantified?
Are quantitative methods always better?
What is wrong with risk matrices?
How should uncertainty be communicated?
شواهد را از همین صفحه ارسال کنید.
گزارش‌ها is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- ایمیلدرگاه GW-GCRIاز همین صفحه ارسال کنیدشواهد، یک اصلاحیه، یک مورد، یک روش، یک داوری، یک ترجمه یا ورودی نمایه. با برچسب این صفحه میرسد تا ویراستار مسئول آن را دریافت کند.
- Zenodoسپردهٔ بازآن را واگذار کنید و به جامعه ارائه دهیدسابقهٔ خود را با شناسهٔ ORCID خود در Zenodo منتشر کنید و سپس آن را در همانجا به جامعهٔ Reports ارسال کنید. گزینشگران آن را داوری می‌کنند؛ DOI از آنِ شما میماند.
- گزارش‌هاGCRIهمهٔ راههای مشارکت را ببینیدانواع مشارکت، نحوهٔ بررسی هر یک، اعتباری که دریافت میکنید، مجوز و آنچه هرگز پذیرفته نمیشود.
هرگز داده شخصی، جزئیات حساس زیرساخت یا چیزی را که حق اشتراکش را ندارید نفرستید. هر مشارکت پیش از استفاده داوری می‌شود؛ ارسال آن حق مؤلفی یا ویرایشی نمی‌دهد و حمایت مالی هرگز یافته‌ای را نمی‌خرد.
یک روش، یک مجموعه‌داده یا یک پرسش بیاورید.
اطلاعات و درخواست‌ها امروز باز است. هر درخواست یک شمارهٔ پیگیری می‌گیرد و گام بعدی را مشخص می‌کند؛ درخواست‌های عضویت، پرداخت‌ها، تخصیص رایانش و ثبت‌نام‌ها تنها زمانی باز می‌شوند که تیم، شرایط و ظرفیت داوری آن‌ها فراهم باشد.
اسناد حقوقی.
نقشه‌ها، داده‌ها و ارقام این سایت برای زمینه و اطلاعات عمومی نشان داده می‌شوند. توصیه، پیش‌بینی یا هشدار نیستند؛ حدود این اطلاعات در سلب مسئولیت‌ها و اعلامیه‌های داده بیان شده است.