The Price of Safety and Economic Reliability

Part of the Springer Series in Reliability Engineering book series (RELIABILITY)


Safety, by contrast, is both a consequence and a potential source of risk which is either objective, measured in terms of the probabilities and the consequences that define risk or perceptive—reflecting a state of mind, objective or conditioned. As a result, safety assumes many and compounded forms, such as being protected from consequential events or from being exposed to something that causes a loss. Practically, the word safety is used in many contexts. It may refer to home safety and allude to protective measures taken against external and harmful events (like weather, home invasion, etc.), computer safety in the sense of cyber security or to specific elements in use (stairs, cars, food, etc.). For example, see [2, 5, 15]. By the same token, safety may be inherent to a car’s reliability and to designs constructed to prevent accidental losses (or “safe at any speed” and thereby lead to some drivers to drive recklessy).


Risk Aversion Risk Attitude Expected Profit Risk Free Rate Firm Profit 


  1. 1.
    Ale B (2002) Risk assessment practices in the Netherlands. Saf Sci 40:105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ale B, Smith E, Pitblado R (2000) Safety around airport—developments in 1990s and future directions. Det Norske Veritas, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Antle JM (1996) Efficient food safety regulation in the food manufacturing sector. Am J Agric Econ 78(4):1242–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antle JM (2000) The cost of quality in the meat industry: implications for HACCP regulation. In: Unnevehr LJ (ed) The economics of HACCP-costs and benefits, Chap. 6. Eagan Press, Saint Paul, pp 81–96Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bahr N (1997) System safety engineering and risk assessment: a practical approach. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bakker GJ, Blom HAP (1993) Air traffic collision risk modeling. In: Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barlow R, Proschan F (1965) Mathematical theory of reliability. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barnett A (2000) Free-flight and en route air safety: a first-order analysis. Oper Res 48:833–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blom HAP, Klompstra MB, Bakker GJ (2003) Accident risk assessment of simultaneous converging instrument approaches. National Airspace Laboratory (Report NLR-TP-2003-557), AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Blom HAP, Corker KM, Stroeve SH (2005) Study on the integration of human performance and accident risk assessment models: AIR-MIDAS & TOPAZ. In: Proceedings of the sixth USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blom HAP, Stroeve SH, de Jong HH (2006) Safety risk assessment by monte carlo simulation of complex safety critical operations. In: Proceedings of the 14th safety critical systems symposium, BristolGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blom HAP, Bakker GJ, Blanker PJG, Daams J, Everdij MHC, Klompstra MB (1998) Accident risk assessment for advanced ATM. In: Proceedings of the second USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boeing Commercial Airplanes (2006) Statistical summary of commercial jet airplane accidents: worldwide operations 1959–2005. Boeing Commercial Airplanes, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bo-Hyun Cho L, Neal Hooker H (2009) Comparing food safety standards. Food Control 20:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cox JJ, Tait N (1991) Reliability, safety and risk management, Butterworth-Heinemann, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) (2005) Passenger ship safety: effective voyage planning for passenger ships, Formal Safety Assessment—large passenger ships navigation, Sub Committee on Safety of Navigation, 50th session, 2005, NAV50/11/1,
  17. 17.
    Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) (2006a) Consideration on utilization of Bayesian network at step 3 of FSA, Maritime Safety Committee, 81st session, MSC 81/18/1Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) (2006b) FSA study on ECDIS/ENCs. Maritime Safety Committee, 81st session. MSC81/24/5,
  19. 19.
    Federal Aviation Administration (2005) European Organization for Safety of Air Navigation (2005) ATM safety techniques and toolbox, safety action plan-15. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    GAIN (2003) Guide to methods & tools for safety analysis in air traffic management. Global Aviation Information Network.
  21. 21.
    Ha JS, Seong PH (2003) A method for risk-informed safety significance categorization using the analytic hierarchy process and Bayesian belief networks. Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 373-1, Guseong-Dong, Yuseong-Gu, Daejeon 305-701, South Korea, 2003Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hale A (2002) Risk contours and risk management criteria for safety at major airports, with particular reference to the case of Schiphol. Safety Sci 40:299–323MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Huang H-W, Shih C, Yih S, Chen M-H (2008) Integrated software safety analysis method for digital I&C systems. Ann Nucl Energy 35:1471–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2002) Guidelines for the application of Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process.
  25. 25.
    Janic M (2000) An assessment of risk and safety in civil aviation. J Air Trans Manag 6:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Luxhøj JT (2003) Probabilistic causal analysis for safety risk assessments in commercial air transport, Workshop on investigating and reporting of incidents and accidents (IRIA), September 16–19, 2003, WilliamsburgGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Luxhoj J, Coit D (2006) Modeling low probability/high consequence events: an aviation safety risk model. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), Newport BeachGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Markowitz HM (1959) Portfolio selection; efficient diversification of investments. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Netjasov F, Janic M (2008) A review of research on risk and safety modelling in civil aviation. J Air Trans Manag 14:213–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pedrali M, Cagno E, Trucco P, Ruggeri F (2004) Towards the integration of human and organizational factors in risk assessment. A case study for the marine industry, Second international Asranet colloquium, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Phadke MS (1986) Quality engineering using robust design. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pikaar AJ, Piers MA, Ale B (2000) External risk around airports—a model update. National Airspace Laboratory (Report NLR-TP-2000-400), AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rouvroye JL, van den Bliek EG (2002) Comparing safety analysis techniques. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75:289–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Taguchi G, Elsayed EA, Hsiang T (1989) Quality engineering in production systems. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tapiero CS (1996) The management of quality and its control. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tapiero S (1997) The economic effects of reliable and unreliable testing technologies, ICJMGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tapiero CS (2004) Risk and financial management: mathematical and computational concepts. Wiley, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tapiero CS (2004) Risk management. In: Teugels J, Bjorn S (eds) John Wiley Encyclopedia on ActuarialGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tapiero S (2005) Value at risk and inventory control. Eur J Oper Res 163(3):769–775CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tapiero CS (2006) Risks and assets pricing. In: Huang P (eds) Handbook of engineering statistics. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tapiero S (2007) Consumers risk and quality control in a collaborative supply chain. Eur J Oper Res 182:683–694CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tapiero Charles S (2005) Reliability design and RVaR. Int J Reliab Qual Safety Eng (IJRQSE) 2(4):347–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tapiero CS (2010) Finance and risk assets pricing. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) (1998) Safety study of the operational relationship between ship master/watchkeeping officers and marine pilots.
  45. 45.
    Truccoa P, Di Giulio A, Randazzo G, Pedrali M (2003) Towards a systematic organisational analysis for improving safety assessment of the maritime transport system, in safety and reliability. In: Bedford T, Van Gelder PHAJM (eds) Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, ESREL’03, pp 513–21Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Truccoa P, Cagnoa E, Ruggerib F, Grandea O (2008) A Bayesian belief network modelling of organisational factors in risk analysis: a case study in maritime transportation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93:823–834Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Finance and Risk EngineeringThe Polytechnic Institute of New York UniversityBrooklynNew York

Personalised recommendations