Critical Challenges and Difficulties in Safety, Security, Environment and Health: Why Are We So Bad at Managing SSEH Problems?

  • Myriam Merad
  • Benjamin D. Trump
Part of the Risk, Systems and Decisions book series (RSD)


Up to this Chapter, we have described the roles and responsibilities of key constituents within expertise process when dealing with risk SSEH risk. These key actors and concepts include:


  1. Anders G. (2008). Hiroshima est partout. Editions du Seuil. 519 pages.Google Scholar
  2. Arendt, H. (2005). Le Système totalitaire. Editions Seuil. Révisée par Hélène Frappat.Google Scholar
  3. Borrier, M. (1999). Le nucléaire à l’épreuve de l’organisation, Coll. Le Travail Humain. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  4. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 1 and 2). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Jasanoff, S. (1998). The political science of risk perception. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 59(1), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order. Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Kervern, G-Y. (1995). Eléments fondamentaux des cindyniques. Edition Economica. 112 pages.Google Scholar
  8. Le Moigne, J. L. (1995). Les épistémologies constructivistes.Google Scholar
  9. Le Moigne, J-L. (2002). Le Constructivisme –Tome 2 Epistémologie de l’interdisciplinarité. Ed L’Harmattan, Coll. Ingenium.Google Scholar
  10. Linkov, I., & Trump, B. D. (2019). The science and practice of resilience. Springer International Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Linkov, I., Trump, B., Jin, D., Mazurczak, M., & Schreurs, M. (2014). A decision-analytic approach to predict state regulation of hydraulic fracturing. Environmental Sciences Europe, 26(1), 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Llory, M. (1999). L’accident de la centrale nucléaire de Three Mile Island. Paris: Éditions L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  13. Merad, M., & Trump, B. D. (2018). The legitimacy principle within French risk public policy: A reflective contribution to policy analytics. Science of the Total Environment, 645, 1309–1322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ollagnon, H. (1989). Une approche patrimoniale de la qualité du milieu naturel. In M. Jollivet (Ed.), Du rural à l’environnement, la question de la nature aujourd’hui (pp. 258–268). L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  15. Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. New York: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambrige: Cambrige University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reason, J. (1997). Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  18. Renn, O. (2008). Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex (p. 455). London: World Earthscan/Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Slovic, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risks. Society of Risk Assessments: How safe is safe enough? New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  20. Trump, B. D., Linkov, F., Edwards, R. P., & Linkov, I. (2015). Not a Humbug: The evolution of patient-centred medical decision-making. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 20(6), 193–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Trump, B. D., Florin, M. V., & Linkov, I. (2018a). IRGC resource guide on resilience (Volume 2) (No. BOOK). International Risk Governance Center (IRGC).Google Scholar
  22. Trump, B. D., Kadenic, M., & Linkov, I. (2018b). A sustainable Arctic: Making hard decisions. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 50(1), e1438345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Trump, B. D., Cegan, J. C., Wells, E., Keisler, J., & Linkov, I. (2018c). A critical juncture for synthetic biology: Lessons from nanotechnology could inform public discourse and further development of synthetic biology. EMBO Reports, 19(7), e46153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Turner, B. A. (1978). Man-made disasters. Wykeham, 254 pages.Google Scholar
  25. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at Nasa. The University of Chicago Press. 576 p.Google Scholar
  27. Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected (Vol. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  28. Westen, D. (2007). The political brain. The role of emotion in deciding the fate of the nation. v457 pp. PublicAffairs.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Myriam Merad
    • 1
  • Benjamin D. Trump
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUMR ESPACEParisFrance
  2. 2.US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development CenterConcordUSA

Personalised recommendations