Abstract:In the context of a changing urban environment and increasing demand due to population growth, alternative water sources must be explored in order to create future water security. Risk assessments play a pivotal role in the take-up of new and unfamiliar water projects, acting as a decision-making tool for business cases. Perceptions of risk ultimately drive risk assessment processes, therefore providing insight into understanding projects that proceed and those that do not. Yet there is limited information on the risk perceptions water professionals have of new and unfamiliar water projects. In this study, 77 water professionals were surveyed from across the Melbourne metropolitan water industry to examine risk perceptions over a range of different, unfamiliar water projects. The qualitative data was thematically analysed, resulting in a number of risk perception factors for each hypothetical project. Risk factors that recurred most frequently are those that relate to community backlash and to the reputation of the organisation. These social risk perceptions occurred more frequently than other more technical risks, such as operational risks and process-related risks. These results were at odds with the existing literature assessing risk perceptions of business-as-usual projects, which presented cost as the key risk attribute. This study sheds light on the perceived nature of new and unfamiliar processes in the water sector, providing an understanding that public perceptions do matter to experts involved in water infrastructure decision-making.
Cities are playing an increasingly vital role in global sustainability. Yet there is still little systematic and international evidence on the recognition and formal role of cities in multilateral affairs. Where and how are cities acknowledged as part of global efforts? How do the United Nations frame this 'urban' contribution to major international processes and agendas? To offer some initial evidence-based pointers to this set of problems, we present an analysis of explicit references to cities in major UN frameworks (n = 32) underpinning the current Agenda 2030 on sustainable development. We investigate how cities are cited to determine the role, key themes and contextual trends framing the engagement between United Nations and cities. Contra arguments for the uniqueness of the current 'rise' of mayors, our review demonstrates a weak rise in the recognition of cities over time in UN frameworks and shows historical continuity in this acknowledgement since the 1970s. Our review confirms that two prevailing themes determining this are those of 'development' and the 'environment' but other issues (like 'infrastructure' and 'health') are following closely behind. It also highlights acknowledgment of cities as 'actors' is on the rise since the 2000s and raises fundamental questions as to the status of cities internationally. We argue it becomes imperative to more systematically and strategically think of the role of cities in the UN system, but also flag that raises fundamental challenges for multilateral governance. Policy Implications• Diplomats need to speak of and to cities more regularly: rather than a 'novelty', cities have been repeatedly called upon by the United Nations over the last 50 years, with a growing formalised recognition as international 'actors'.• When establishing 'cities'-oriented projects and programmes, UN agencies and diplomats need to engage with a vast and already existing variety 'urban' recognitions, accounting for at least 1,246 acknowledgments in 32 UN frameworks since 1972.
A survey of 77 water practitioners within Melbourne, Australia, highlighted the lack of objectiveness within current risk scoring processes. Each water authority adopted similar processes, all of which adhere to the ISO31000 standard on Risk Management, and these were tested within this study to determine the “objective” nature of technical risk assessments such as these. The outcome of the study indicated that current risk measurement approaches cannot be seen as objective. This is due to the high variation in risk scores between individuals, which indicates a level of subjectivity. The study confirms previous research that has been undertaken in assessing the effectiveness of risk matrices. This research is novel in its testing of the water sector’s risk measuring practices and may be of value to other industries that utilize similar risk approaches. This research posits whether this subjectivity is due to inherent bias of either a psychological or cultural risk nature that could produce the varied scores.
In many circumstances within the water industry, project managers act as the gatekeepers for new infrastructure and water projects by way of determining, or at least providing, an assessment of whether to proceed with the project. Their assessments, which are considerably based on risk, disproportionately assume a technical, rational approach. Psychological, sociological and cultural risk approaches provide a comprehensive guide into how risks are assessed, highlighting areas that are not considered by the traditional technical risk approach. This article provides a review of these approaches, and in so doing contends that existing risk assessments in the water industry ignore sociological and psychological contexts in situations, leading to an assessment that may not be reliable.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.