November 3, 2011
EPFL, Rolex Learning Center, Lausanne, Switzerland —
Public Conference – LEARNING FROM LARGE-SCALE INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS
WHEN DISASTERS CAN BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVING SAFETY AND RISK GOVERNANCE
IRGC held a public conference co-organised with the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)
It appears from the March 2011 Fukushima Dai-Ichi accident in Japan and based on the many indirect and often far reaching consequences in other countries that:
The main topic of this conference was: lessons learned from past accidents. For example, following the core meltdown at one of the reactors at the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear power station and the industrial accidents that occurred at chemical and pesticide plants in Seveso and Bhopal, risk managers made major progress in improving safety and risk governance. The TMI accident resulted in the creation of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) which has dramatically improved US nuclear power operations and safety. Bhopal and Seveso led to a wide range of changes and improvements in the chemical industry including the creation of the ICCA Responsible Care Initiative.
Following some key note presentations, a panel of experts and practitioners from Europe, the US and Asia were invited to discuss on how we have learned from and built better risk governance institutions and processes in the wake of past disasters, with a view to elaborate recommendations for improving safety, communication and overall risk governance of highly risky industrial activities.
The conference was chaired and moderated by Prof. Granger Morgan, Head, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University.
Speakers and their presentations included:
Welcome remarks:
Speakers:
Panel with speakers and members of the IRGC Scientific and Technical Council:
Concluding remarks:
Roundtable 1 – How can we improve the anticipation of and early response to emerging risks?
One of IRGC’s missions is to help organisations in the public or private sectors to improve their anticipation of emerging risks. In a context of globalisation and systemic risks, this proves to be a challenge to many. IRGC’s assumption is that new or emerging risks are not the same for all organisations. The context and the culture in which an organisation operates will determine to a large extent the risks that may affect it.
IRGC is conducting a project on emerging risks that takes place in two phases. Phase 1 focused on how and why risks emerge. It was concluded with the publication of a report on “Contributing Factors to Risk Emergence”. Phase 2 is starting now. Its purpose is to develop practical guidelines for practitioners in business and the public sector, helping them improve their own capabilities to understand, anticipate and respond to emerging risks.
The roundtable was a dialogue between scientists and practitioners on some of the issues raised in this project.
It was facilitated by Prof. Ortwin Renn, Stuttgart University, with Michel Maila, a member of the IRGC Board.
Some comments from participants
“…both the content and the presentations from various delegates were insightful and thought provoking”
“A good range and variety of speakers and participants, very good for making contact with actors from different organisational/business backgrounds.”
“Some issues that were discussed are issues under debate in (my organisation). Insights from the annual event provide useful input into those discussions.”
“Very transdisciplinary setting, with people involved who were interested to exchange their experience and ideas. The design was well set as it included IRGC work and additional work from other fields.”
Roundtable Content
1. Detailed Programme for Roundtable 1 [PDF]
2. Roundtable 1 Summary Report [PDF]
3. Roundtable 1 Presentations
Participants
Participants in roundtable 1 included a diverse mix of experts from the private sector (e.g. Syngenta, Nestlé, PwC, MunichRe, SwissRe, Oliver Wyman), public sector (government representatives including from Singapore, the Netherlands, Abu Dhabi and Switzerland), international organisations (e.g., OECD, WEF, UNISDR) and academia (e.g., Oxford University, Stuttgart University, EPFL, ETHZ).
Roundtable 2 – How can we improve the provision of more consistent science and technology advice in support of risk governance and sustainable innovation?
Managing the crucial relationship between technological innovation, risk governance and public acceptability
Today’s risk governance in fields related to or involving science and technology requires:
The roundtable was a dialogue between scientists and practitioners on some of the issues that are involved in the provision of science and technology advice for policy, innovation and risk governance. It was facilitated by Prof. Granger Morgan, Carnegie Mellon University.
Expert contributions were organised along two themes:
Theme 1: Institutions for technically-based risk and policy analysis: an overview of the situation in the US, in Europe and in Asia
Theme 2: Public and private regulation and incentives
Other experts and practitioners were invited to contribute.
Some comments from participants
Roundtable Content
Participants
Participants in roundtable 2 included a diverse mix of experts from the public sector (regulatory agencies or government representatives including from Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom), the private sector (e.g., Swiss Re, Novartis, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Du Pont de Nemours International, National Grid), academia (e.g., MIT, Tsinghua University, EPFL, ETHZ), research institutes and independent organisations.
IRGC partners: