The risk is an exposure to a Danger potential, inherent in a situation or an activity.
“ the risk indicates a Danger identified, associated well with the occurrence of a event or a series of events, perfectly describable, which one does not know not if they occur but which one knows that they are likely to occur. It is easy to include/understand why the concept of risk, thus defined, does not make it possible to describe them situations of Uncertainty and to give an account of the methods of the catch of Decision in such contexts. One knows what one does not know but it is about all that one knows: it does not have there better definition of uncertainty. To know to anticipate, track them potential overflows, to set up a system of Monitoring and collection systematic of the data to start the Alarm S as soon as odd events produce: the list of the measures to be taken is long, which suggests that the Ignorance is not a fate and that to reason in term of uncertainty, it is already to give the means of in to take the measurement. ” source:
The evaluation of the risks is the determining factor of very taken Décision. It is very often Intuitive in our actions of the every day, but gains with being formalized within the framework of a Projet Industriel which comprises a dimension Financière for example.
Difficulty of the approach by the risks
If the beat of wing of a butterfly in Sydney can start a tornado in Miami, the existence of billion butterflies prevents us from envisaging when and where the next tornado will take place. And if we believe in our capacity to act on our future, there then does not exist one, but myriads of possible futures, dependant on our choices, that of our entourage and laws which govern us.
This is why the approach by the risks presents difficulties dependant on the Complexité and an increasing interdependence of the organisational Système S contemporaries, in particular related on the context of Mondialisation, and to the economic and sociétaux upheavals which it induces. We have nevertheless all need for scenarios, figures and facts to be able to protect us, protect our close relations and to decide in the dubious one.
The risk is the subject of several close definitions, which combine a whole a concept of probability, i.e. the possibility or not that an event occurs, and a consequence when this event occurs. Here are some:
- “Combination of the probability of an event and its consequences” (ISO/CEI 73), “Combination of the probability of a damage and its gravity” (ISO/CEI 51)
- Possibility of supervening of a damage resulting from an exposure to a Danger or a dangerous phenomenon. The risk is the combination of the probability of occurrence of a dreaded event (incidental or accident) and the gravity of its consequences on a given target.
- Probabilité that a specific effect occurs during a given time or given circumstances (Directive n° 96/82 of the Council of December 9th, 1996).
- Expectation of losses in human lives, casualties, damage with the goods and attack with the economic activity during one base period and in a given area, for a particular Risk. The risk is the product of the risk by the vulnerability Guide 51 cf Exposition.
- possible future Event having an negative impact on a good, a project, a business… the risk thus will be characterized by a Probabilité of occurrence and an effect with the case or the event occurs.
; Residual risk:
- “Risk remaining after the treatment of the risk” (ISO/CEI 73),
- “remaining Risk after preventive measures were taken” (ISO/CEI 51)
scientific Definition of the risk:
It was given in 1738 per Daniel Bernoulli in " Specimen theoriae novae of will mensura left " : " The risk is the expectation of a function of probability of événements". In simpler terms, it is about the median value of the consequences of affected events of their probability. Thus, an event E 1 has a probability of occurrence p 1 with a probable consequence C 1; in the same way an event E N will have a probability p N and a consequence C N, then the risk will be worth R = p 1. C 1 + p 2. C 2 +… + p N. C N. A product p I. C I is called value of risk I.
This definition implies, for the calculation of the risk, the knowledge of a statistical succession of events or at the very least an approximate or subjective estimate of various the " plausibilités" (supposed probabilities) and of the consequences of the imagined risks, when one does not have by histories events and that in spite of that one wishes to evaluate a risk. The risk appears " physiquement" like the center of gravity of the consequences of the events thus of the risks.
One will note with interest that the risk is the sum of the risks and that the product frequency X gravity often evoked by no means represents the risk but only the value of a given risk.
The first difficulty in the risk management is the fact that the event concerned, the damage is in the future. It is this concept of future of which the concept of possible derives, of probable or " potentiel". But it has also many other consequences:
the risk takes a different dimension according to the temporal horizon in which one is located. For example, the disappearance of our sun takes very an other importance according to whether one is located in the near future (it will most probably make day tomorrow) or a remote future (the sun will end up exploding then to disappear from manner quasi some, and humanity with if she still exists)
- the future is a business of belief. In particular, the first of the beliefs which applies to the concept of risk relates to the deterministic vision (the future is written) or not deterministic (we can influence from our will the future) who influence our capacity of action vis-a-vis the risk
- Prévoir the future forces to have a model. This model is reducing forcing, privileges certain aspects compared to others and thus brings different behaviors according to the selected models. For example, the professional risk management in a company leads to different priorities according to whether one treats it by an economic model (to decrease number and cost of the accidents) or human (to prevent the handicapping accidents or mortals).
One of the difficulties in the risk management is the fact that the degree of exposure and thus the fatal consequence are often dubious, and that our own knowledge or ignorance of this risk influences its probability. For example, the presence of a control panel road indicating a dangerous turn is sometimes enough to strongly decrease, to even remove the accidents in this turn.
Moreover, once the avoided risk, and even if one is sure that there were quite real Cause S of risk for a multiplicity of Organization S, it is not obvious that the Réalité of the risk is recognized a posteriori if there no were detrimental consequence for the Civil society. Thus, in our preceding example, the absence of accident can bring to dispute the interest of the panel since " no accident there produit" , to even remove it.
This is why, even if the risk comprises characteristics Statistique S, to reduce it to this dimension can be misleading. Such an approach can make forget determining factors of its appearance, as well as the context necessary to transform a risk in accident.
Certain configurations of the Environnement (for example, a cliff above the sea) can cause situations Dangereuse S (for example the fact of being in height above the sea). These dangerous situations lead to risks (for example a big risk to fall and to commit suicide). The realization of this risk (the Accident) remains nevertheless potential and not proven. On the one hand that can give the impression which the situation will not degrade (impression of Sécurité), on the other hand that makes difficult the forecast of the accident: it is necessary to imagine an event which will perhaps never take place.
For this kind of risk almost nonmeasurable, concerning a potential Danger against which it is difficult to be secured, one will prefer the name of Incertitude or Aléa. The Precaution principle can apply to situations where the scientific data miss to qualify the height or the nature of the danger, for example for a emergent Maladie, or a new situation (GMO cultivated into full fields).
In fact, a person is not necessarily Consciente that it takes a risk (it is particularly the case of the young child in particular), and contrary it can believe that there exists a risk, whereas there is no danger. Or even, it can perceive behind the name of a possible hazard of the dangers without relationship with the real risk. For example, one saw, at the time of the data-processing Passage to the year 2000, much of people to think that, because of the Bogue of the year 2000, the planes would be likely to fall on January 1st, the elevators to break down, etc whereas actually, the risk was primarily in the field of the Business computing, and more precisely in the Mainframe S, the Micro-informatique, the Web, and the chips being not very affected. The risk was total: a general disorganization of the economy, and it was likely to appear at other times that on January 1st, 2000.
One sees at which point the Perception of the risk can be blocked or amplified by factors Subjectif S, specific to each human being, and even by factors Culturel S or of the economic situation specific to human Communauté S.
Concepts in Risk management
The risk is traditionally formalized starting from three concepts:
The Risk factor (sometimes called danger or danger) is an element present likely to cause a risk, i.e. the supervening of the accident. For example, the fact of misusing alcohol consumption before taking the wheel strongly increases the probability of an accident, the fact of working on a scaffolding can cause a fall height. The Risk factors are qualified by their field (human, Culturel, material, Technique (toxic risk, thermal, of Explosion.), Legal, etc) or their point of application (the itself project, and the Organization within which it will fit). They are quantified in level of uncertainty and/or complexity. The Criticité is the combination of the impact (or effect or gravity) and of the Probabilité of a risk (AFNOR), often evaluated on a scale from 1 to 4, is related to the intensity of the accident (or gravity, or severity) when it occurs.
The Vulnérabilité is characterized by the losses induced by the realization of a random event striking a resource of the Entreprise. The vulnerability is identified by the three parameters:
- Object of the risk,
- Causes: Risk factors, dangers,
- Consequences: potential impact.
The supervening of a Accident is thus the result of a combination of Risk factors, whose Criticité S become such that they generate strong a Vulnérabilité leading to an accident. An car accident will be able to occur for a driver which drank alcohol, in the presence of a truck, on a dangerous road, whereas it rain (four Risk factors), the probability and the impact of the accident being all the more important as the alcohol amount absorptive by the driver was important, the powerful and heavy truck, the sinuous road and without visibility, and the beating rain (criticalities).
It is thus fundamental, for perceiving well, to identify and evaluate the risks on the collective level, not to omit a Risk factor. Psychological dimension (at the individual level) or Culturelle (at the collective level) should not be underestimated, because the cognitive Biais S are frequent in the groups, and they can plug the individuals or of the groups compared to certain types of risks, and when same the cognitive Biais S is repeated in the individuals of same a Communauté and within various groups, that leads to a cultural Biais , which amplifies the Risk factor.
Phases of the risk management
The precision of the risk management is fundamental, since it is it which can prevent the accident.
Perception of the risks
One saw that the feeling of risk is a phenomenon very Subjectif, even Irrationnel, related to the way which an individual has Percevoir a situation in his Environnement, which depends for a good portion on the cultural Capital on the individual and his Intérêt S. These perceptions different necessarily from an individual to another. He can exist besides a shift of appreciation between the leaders and the Employé S, the latter having a vision necessarily more Opérationnelle. Various factors can enter in account to block the collective perception of a situation: fallacious Reasoning, Sophism S, Oblique cognitive S (Illusion,…) who, according to the cases, can be Conscient S or Inconscient S.
So that the Perception of the risk is not blocked by these phenomena, it is completely desirable that the Entreprise sets up a device of day before, so as to detect the weak Signaux as soon as possible.
The perception of the risk initially carries Essentiellement on the Risk factors (or dangers). The device of day before must envisage a division of the signals Perçus to validate the principal features of them.
Identification of the risks
This level, it is necessary to identify the risk, i.e., among the weak Signaux detected, to recognize those which contain important possible hazards. This requires the installation of an economic device of Intelligence coordinated, in order to carry out an excavated analysis of the weak Signaux.
The risk or situation at the risks rises on the one hand from the existence of a danger (risk factor or danger) and on the other hand of the presence of the man in the zone of danger (object of the risk). It is useful on the matter to refer to the standard IN 1050.
At the time of the phase of identification of the risks, one will pay the attention not only on the causes (Risk factors or dangers), but also on the objects of risk, entrepreneurial resources potentially impacted by these Risk factors, by looking at associated criticalities.
The Criticité depends on the Probabilité so that a risk factor occurs (presence in a dangerous zone , in contact with the phenomenon dangerous, or subjected to the dangerous event).
This last parameter is itself function of several factors suitable for the system work, that is to say the individual (its formation, its Expérience, its Connaissance S,…), its tasks (or its functions, its need for access in the danger zone), work environment (the Environment) and matter used to achieve work (tools, Raw material,…).
The Connaissance of these various parameters is not easy the more so as there exists a third parameter which is the consequence of the risk, or on the contrary the possibility of avoidance of the dangerous event. Most of the time the past gives us the Information S on the gravity and the occurrence of a factor; this is why it is difficult to oppose method a priori and a posteriori, because the first is inevitably nourished second.
This stage, the analysis of the Vulnérabilité S can be confined with the risk factors and the objects of risk.
Evaluation of the risks
After the phases of Perception and identification of the risks, in which the human factor and Culturel play a crucial role, as one comes to see it, one must also evaluate the risks by taking account of the possible consequences.
In this phase of evaluation, one now takes into account the whole of the parameters of the vulnerability: causes (risk factors or dangers), objects of risk (organizations or resources at the risk), and consequences (impact) with their potential gravities.
A first method consists in adopting a statistical approach. Just as the mathematicians wanted to quantify the Hasard by inventing the Probabilité S, the economists wanted to quantify economic uncertainty by modelling the risks.
This quantification which always keeps a more or less estimated side, is carried out from:
- series Statistical S histories. The financial theory tends to confuse the real risk of a Financial credit and the indicator of risk which is the Volatilité passed from the price of this credit, although nothing says that the evolutions last are a good indicator of the future;
- Probability S subjective or objective;
- calculation algorithms whose Monte Carlo celebrates it;
- Scenario S futures of profits and losses.
Thus, the financial theory known as modern strongly developed the use of probabilistic mathematics to estimate the value of the credits . In theory, more the heavy risk on a Actif is strong, more its price on the market is low and its high Rendement awaited, so at least the market is efficient.
This approach is especially adopted in the mediums or one can have of statistics and models to exploit them. It is in particuler the case for the financial circle.
This is why the experts in risk management developed a method evaluation called " Frequency - gravité" who consists in calculating a weight of the risk starting from several criteria. The various criteria (generally evaluated from 1 to 4) vary according to experts and methods, but one generally finds:
the frequency of the risk quantifying the probability that the risk becomes reality
- the gravity of the consequence
- the control by the people concerned of the risks in the field
These criteria are evaluated, sometimes in a subjective way. They are then multiplied, giving a figure (thus from 1 to 64) making it possible to classify and allot a priority of treatment of the risk.
According to the scientific definition of risk (D. Bernoulli), the subjective approach, by the method " frequency-gravité" who authorizes us to estimate on the one hand, of the " plausibilités" or of the " vraisemblances" according to the term of Marcel Bowl (French mathematician) and in addition, consequences, conduit with the value of a risk (i.e. of a predetermined dangerous event) and not at the risk (the risk having a more total concept; to see " Scientific definition of the risque"). Also, to estimate a risk (without statistical history) it is necessary to predetermine several possible events of comparable nature, to estimate their plausibilities (their nap having to be equal to 1 - the sum of the probabilities being equal to 1) to consider their consequences possible then to estimate each risk. The real scientific value of the risk will be then the sum of the risks.
The Risk management is the penultimate data processing run of the risk. It aims at reducing the various forms or sources of them. As soon as one evaluated strongest Vulnérabilité S, one knows best the causes, the objects of risk, and the consequences for these vulnerabilities.
There exist various strategies to treat the risks:
To prevent: the action consists in decreasing the probability of occurrence of the risk by decreasing or removing some of the risk factors. We can quote as example the many actions made to prevent from leading under the influence of alcohol
- Préparer the correction: the action consists in decreasing the effect of the risk when this one intervenes. For example, a harness of protection on a scaffolding does not have any effect on the risks of fall, but strongly decreases (even removes completely) the traumatisms caused by the fall.
- To change the perimeter: the action consists to some extent with " to benefit from the occurrence of the risque" , not to decrease the probability or the consequences by them, but by using with its profit the event. It is the typical case of the insurance, which prevents neither the accident, nor your house to burn, but which proposes a " to you; dédommagement" for the damage undergone
The action plan then consists in acting on all the parameters of the Vulnérabilité on which one has a lever of possible action:
- endogenous causes, or exogenic causes on which the organization would have means of action (close Recipients),
- the Ressources, while seeking to decrease the weaknesses by them, and to increase the forces by them (see SWOT),
- consequences, by taking the Décision S suitable to avoid largest Danger S.
It is obvious that the more one has the control on the risk factors, the more one can act upstream on those:
- the Prévention is often the best strategy for its own resources. For example, to train its personnel with the occupational hazards, to choose a manufacturing method made safe,…
- Minimiser the impact is often an effective strategy when one cannot act on the risk factor itself, but which one can act on his consequences. For example, one cannot prevent an avalanche, but one can arrange avalanche corridors to channel it.
- to ensure itself is the last means of treating the random consequences of undergone events completion.
The risk management calls sometimes upon the game theory which associates an economic equation with random events, and thus associates a cost with the risk. This theory brings a particular lighting on the risk management. In particular on two strategies very different of optimization:
To minimize the losses: it is a question of making so that the expectation of the losses is weakest possible. The financial products show in this field a very strong creativity.
- To maximize the profits: it is a question of making so that the expectation of the profits is strongest possible. Accordingly, to be unaware of the risks is unfortunately often the best strategy.
Some aspects of the risk
On the level of the whole of a political zone, the ethical of the businesses is likely to reinforce the saving in this zone, as one sees it for the rules defined in the the United States (federal sentencing guidelines).
This type of approach tends today to also develop in Europe. One speaks about ethical in economic intelligence for example. It is one of the factors of the economic model of Intelligence.
In each Undertaken, the strategies of Sustainable development often resulted in defining charters of ethical, or charters of company, accepted more or less well by the Employé S.
The risk compared to the Right
In Right French, the risk is the possibility of a future, dubious event or of an unspecified term, not depending exclusively on the will of the parts, and being able to cause a Préjudice like the loss of an object or very other Dommage.
It also appeared, following two reports/ratios of the Council of State (the first in 1991, and the second, very recent, in March 2006), that the Droit itself can generate risks, in particular because of the inconsistencies or of the complexity of the Loi S and payments, of the late transpositions of European directives, or too frequent changes (legal insecurity).
The Legal security is a principle of the right which aims to protect the Citoyen S against the negative side effects of the Droit. The risk of legal insecurity is thus a risk to be taken into account.
For a Organization given, the legal aspects of the risk are those which can engage the penal Civil responsibility or of the leaders or the Employé S.
The risk in the Industry
In the beginning, the risk management appeared in the industrial sector: maritime transport, exploitations Mining S, auto industry, nuclear industry, oil industry and chemical. The risk also exists in the sector of the Santé, medicine and pharmacy.
It is undoubtedly in the Nuclear industry that the potential impact of the accidents is most important, but also measurements to prevent them are sophisticated. In this sector, one thus speaks about Sûreté, more than of Sécurité. In addition, the Nuclear industry comprises a specificity compared to the other types of Industrie, which is the duration of the Cycle. Indeed, one generally designs an nuclear installation for a Lifespan of about thirty years at least. The Expérience showed that the engines can function a little longer (Fessenheim brought into service in 1975). The new generation of engines in France is conceived for a Lifespan 60 years. Indeed, the déconstruction, according to the current vocabulary, of an nuclear installation is a very heavy operation, and still not carried out on an industrial sphere.
It is of this sector, as well as medicine, that the concepts of risk generally employed in industry come, that we indicated:
The most obvious applications of the risk management Industriel S relate to the Installations classified for environmental protection (ICPE).
Specimen theoriae of will mensura left
The occupational hazard
The risk is inherent in the man and very undertaken human involves risks. The risk is the combination of the Probabilité and (of) the consequence (S) of the occurence of a specified dangerous event (OHSAS 18001). This definition of the risk is very didactic because it easily highlights that to reduce a risk, 2 ways are possible: to act on its Probability of occurrence (by decreasing it by preventive measures) or on its gravity (by setting up protective systems intended to reduce the consequences).
Of these 2 components of the risk, the probability of supervening of the dreaded event on the one hand and the importance of the consequences induced by this event on the other hand, we can make the product of it. This product thus enables us to measure a risk by a very simple formula: Risk = Probability X Revolved .
This very simple formula has something of timeless, because the risk of a dreaded event must be considered at the present, the probability of supervening is a parameter describing in a synthetic way a continuation of events related to last and the gravity of the consequences must take into account a succession of potentially observable events in the future. This formula is very instructive and makes it possible to explain certain observations made on the general public and which sometimes have effects on the experts.
But this vision of the risk is somewhat erroneous compared to the unanimously allowed scientific definition of Daniel Bernoulli ( Specimen theoriae of will mensura left ) who indicates that the risk is the expectation (the average, the center of gravity of the consequences to some extent) of a function of probability of events. In this case probability X produces it gravity represents only the value of a risk; the risk being the sum of the possible risks. (Cf " The risk, this inconnu" , G. Jousse, Imestra Editions, 2004). This integration of the whole of the risks makes it possible to include/understand the risk management by the insurance: although not intervening neither in the probability of the risk, nor in its gravity, the insurance adds an additional dimension which to some extent cancels or compensates for the effects of the event in question.
Risk = Revolved Beaucoup of people confuses risk and revolved and take into account only the cases for which G is important without any consideration for the factor probability. This phenomenon constitutes what certain authors call " fascination by the maximum" risk;.
1 X 1 is not equivalent to 100 X 0..01 the risk is the same one between a scenario of frequent accident and not very serious and a rare and serious scenario but there exists an aversion for this last. The general public often prefers not to accept a scenario catastrophe and very improbable compared to a less serious but more probable scenario.
Risk = Aversion X Probability X Gravity In corollary of the preceding observation, it would be necessary to take account of a factor of aversion specific to each individual and depend on the risk. R = A1 X 1 X 1 and R2 = A2 X 100 X 0.01 with A1 perhaps being worth 0.1 and A2 = 10 we then have R1=0.1 and R2=10 is a factor 100 by the simple fact of the factor of aversion. This factor of aversion is not necessarily rational and can depend on knowledge, relational and of lived of the person.
Risk = Probability (Revolved) X Revolved (Probability) the components Revolved and Probability are not necessarily independent because both can be dependant. Indeed, more one increases the improbability of a scenario, more one can increase his gravity (example, two airbus A3XX entering in collision above a nuclear plant whereas an engine is not generally calculated that to support the fall of only one apparatus). But following the attack of the September 11th, 2001, this scenario is it so incredible that.
The risk in finances
See also: Financial risk
- a monetary possibility of loss
- due to a Uncertainty which one can quantify .
The theory wants (cf Ratio of Sortino), that there would be correlation between the risk taken and the hope of profit.
Finance became largely nowadays a processing industry of anticipations of incomes and risks into instruments whose price can be negotiated on markets or near ad hoc institutions. That allows the transfer of the risks those laid out to take them (against hoped incomes), the compensation of the opposite risks (example the exchange rate risk of an importer is opposite of that of an exporter, the risk of rate of a lender is opposite of that of a borrower…), the diversification of the risks, etc
The risks Natural S
The phenomenon of Climate change, appeared since about thirty years, and identified at the time of the Summit of the ground of Stockholm (1972), showed that there exists a risk of origin Anthropique on the Environnement, which can have impacts on the company. At the time of the Summit of the ground of Rio de Janeiro (1992), then of (Johannesburgh (2002), one formalized steps known as of Sustainable development, whose application in the Entreprise S concerns the Responsabilité sociétale for the companies.
Many natural phenomena (Seism S, tsunamis) do not have a anthropic origin.
The risk is defined like the conjunction of a Aléa, probability of occurrence of a dangerous phenomenon, and a Vulnérabilité, which expresses the foreseeable level of consequence on the exposed stakes, that it acts people, goods, of equipment or environment.
It is the space superposition between the extension of a risk and a Territoire Anthropisé which creates the risk. A seism in the desert almost does not present a consequence, whereas it can be very serious in a territory densément populated. As the dynamic ones of settlement result in occupying of the spaces exposed to the risks (natural) or has to create risks (technological, biological…) within the urban territories , one speaks about social “construction” of the risk.
In the last decades, the emergence of new actors like the ONG, showed that it was necessary to integrate Agent S of the Civil society in the methods of management. One thus saw appearing the concept of Recipient ( stakeholder in English) in certain economic models, in order to satisfy certain requirements of Sustainable development and Responsabilité sociétale (for the Entreprise S).
In this field, the Precaution principle will tend to more and more often apply in the future, but its legal variation between Recipients given is not yet defined very clearly, and thus its implementation is not simple.
A typical example of risk with respect to the Civil society is that of the Nucléaire, and the reaction which certain authorities had, in France in particular, compared to the accident of Tchernobyl. The errors of Communication became increasingly obvious, and involved a suspicion with respect to the organizations which were in the beginning. Finally, after 20 years, one yet precisely does not know the consequences of the catastrophe. The impact in term of Image and reputation was not negligible.
With the world plan, the companies cover against the climatic Risque by buying new types of financial products: climatic derivatives.
See: Derivative products
The risk and the communication
The Communication is however not without risk, as show it certain studies on the communication within the framework of the Responsabilité sociétale for the companies (see the n° 200 of the French re-examined of marketing devoted to the Sustainable development).
What is concerned, it is the Brand image company. In front of the multiplication and the complexification of the risks Sociétaux, the Risk of reputation with respect to the Recipients of the Civil society, must moreover be integrated by the leaders in the Gouvernance of company. It must be taken into account in the analysis of the Vulnérabilité S, and treated by a adequate Communication.
See: Example of communication: the cartography of the main risks in the department of the Hautes-Pyrénées
The risk in the context of Universalization
The risk is today less and less Perçu by our contemporaries like concerning a fate, whereas the companies interpreted the catastrophes a long time (Séisme S, volcanic eruption…) like “” divine.
The decade 1990, that UNO devoted to the Réduction of the risks, led to the multiplication of the publications on the risks and them Gestion (resolution 44/236), but also to the attention paid to the redefinition of the Concept S and method S. This decade confirmed the passage of the hazard paradigm , which regards the risk as a “otherness” external to the company, and which threatens it or disturbs it accidentally, with the taking into account of the risk like a social product, by clearly distinguishing it from the Accident or the Catastrophe, since it keeps a character potential.
Typology of the risks
See also: Financial risk
country Risk: to see monetary and financial Crises
- Risk of counterpart
- Risk of rate: to also see Interest rate
- Exchange rate risk
- Risk of market
- Risk of liquidity: to see Liquidity (finance of company)
Risks on the credits not - financial
technological Risks (or industrialists)
- natural Risks
- Risks in computer security
- plant health Risk
- Risk of loss of competence
- Risk of reputation
- legal Risk, related to the penal Civil responsibility or : for example, Liability for the defective products
- Risks for the Supply chain, in the event of bad Management of the life cycle
- social Risks
- climatic Risk
Engagements of responsibility
Engagements of responsibility are the expression of the risks, when the risk comprises a legal component recognized by the Droit.
One can quote for example the types of civil responsibility:
- Civil responsibility exploitation
- Civil responsibility Produced defective
- Civil responsibility Pollution (see ICPE)
- Civil responsibility owner building
- Civil responsibility owner of building
- Civil responsibility social agent
- rental Civil responsibility
- automobile Civil responsibility
|Random links:||Tchernobyl (virus) | Wilibald Swibert Joseph Gottlieb von Besser | Hubert Neuper | Carsten Höller | State College | Mouvement_de_révolutionnaire_de_Túpac_Amaru|