Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention

, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp 540–544 | Cite as

Study of Methodologies for Risk Assessment in Operational System Safety

  • Mohamed C. Embarek
  • Elias A. Hadjadj
Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed


Several methodologies for risk analysis have been developed to manage major industrial risks. All of these developed scientific methodologies represent the discipline of operational system safety. In the industrial activities, it is often difficult to choose and to find the best and the most appropriate methodology for a given situation which allows us to obtain the most complete and benefic results. In this article, 35 methods were identified to be studied that will allow us to choose and eventually develop the most appropriate methodology in a given situation. We found that these methods are either empirical, statistical or both at the same time and in any case they may be either qualitative or quantitative. The review of all input and output data used permits us to divide them into different classes. To understand the usefulness and role of each methodology links were developed between different classes of input data and different types of methodologies, on the one hand, and on the other hand, links between the different classes of output data and methodologies. This work shows the judicious way to choose or develop the methodology for risk analysis the most appropriate depending on the situation to be analyzed, the availability of the basic input data and the type of results needed.


System safety Risk analysis Safety analysis Risk assessment 


  1. 1.
    Basnyat, S., Chozos, N., Palanque, P.: Multidisciplinary perspective on accident investigation. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. J. (Spec. Edn.) 91(12), 1502–1520 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salvi, O., Kirchsteiger, C., Delvosalle, C., Duijm, N.J., Casal, J., Goossens, L.H.J., Mazzarotta, B., Lebecki, K., Wybo, J.-L., Duserre, G., Londiche, H., Calzia, J.: ARAMIS Accidental risk assessment methodology for industries in the framework of Seveso II directive. In: Paper presented at the seminar on progress in European research on major hazards, Chemical Risks Directorate, Belgian Ministry of Labour, Brussels, October 10, 2001Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aven, T.: Risk analysis and science. Int. J. Reliab. Qual. Saf. Eng. 11, 1–15 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bedford, T., Cooke, R.: Probabilistic Risk Analysis. Foundations and Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aven, T.: Foundations of Risk Analysis—A Knowledge and Decision Oriented Perspective. Wiley, New York (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yang, Z.L., Wang, J., Bonsall, S., Wong, S.: Risk management with multiple uncertain decision making attributes. In: ESREL 2007 Safety and Reliability Conference, Stavanger, Norway, 25–27 June 2007Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lindley, D.V.: Thephilosophy of statistics. The Statistician 49, 293–337 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khan, F.I., Amyotte, P.R.: Integrated inherent safety index (I2SI): a tool for inherent safety evaluation. Process Saf. Prog 23(2), 136–148 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mosleh, A., Wang, C., Groth, K., Mohagehgh, Z.: Integrated Methodology for Identification, Classification and Assessment of Aviation System Risk. Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Center for Risk and Reliability (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gupta, J.P., Edwards, D.W.: A simple graphical method for measuring inherent safety. J. Hazard. Mater. 104, 15–30 (2003)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electro-MechanicsBadji Mokhtar UniversityAnnabaAlgeria

Personalised recommendations