The risk evaluation process is integrated with procedures for handling vague and numerically imprecise probabilities and utilities. A body of empirical evidence has shown that many managers would welcome new ways of highlighting catastrophic consequences, as well as means to evaluating decision situations involving high risks. When events occur frequently and their consequences are not severe, it is relatively simple to calculate the risk exposure of an organisation, as well as a reasonable premium when an insurance transaction is made, relying on variations of the principle of maximising the expected utility. When, on the other hand, the frequency of damages is low, the situation is considerably more difficult, especially if catastrophic events may occur. When the quality of estimates is poor, e.g., when evaluating low-probability/high-consequence risks, the customary use of quantitative rules together with unrealistically precise data could be harmful as well as misleading. We point out some problematic features of evaluations performed using utility theory and criticise the demand for precise data in situations where none is available. As an alternative to traditional models, we suggest a method that allows for interval statements and comparisons, which does not require the use of numerically precise statements of probability, cost, or utility in a general sense. In order to attain a reasonable level of security, and because it has been shown that managers tend to focus on large negative losses, it is argued that a risk constraint should be imposed on the analysis. The strategies are evaluated relative to a set of such constraints considering how risky the strategies are. The shortcomings of utility theory can in part be compensated for by the introduction of risk constraints.

The extreme pressure resulting from modern-day disasters in terms of severe shortages of resources, mass casualties, infrastructure breakdown, large-scale damage and their impact necessitate coordination between all the agencies involved in disaster response. Better coordination in international disaster response operations will make them more effective in organizing the different phases of relief, rehabilitation and recovery. Recent disasters such as the hurricane Katrina, the Indian Ocean tsunami and the earthquake in Haiti have seen multiple civil agencies and the military working together. However, challenges have been identified in civil-military coordination. Differences in working procedures and a lack of knowledge on the others organizational identities resulted in stereotyping and prejudices, which are root obstacles to coordination. The aim of this study was to identify the perception-related challenges in civil-military coordination, and how they are perceived in the field by civil and military teams, and to investigate whether perception-related challenges and their implications have been reported in the international literature. A systematic literature review and 12 semi-structured interviews were carried out to answer these questions. Nine out of the 12 respondents were practitioners from the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) and the Swedish military, with experience of international disaster response missions that involved civil-military interactions, and 3 were trainees from Karlberg Military Academy, Stockholm, who were expected to participate in similar operations in the near future. The questions asked during the interviews were based on the systematic literature review. National backgrounds, attitudes and perceptions of the professionals towards the other organization were found to be key factors influencing civil-military coordination. This indicates that comparisons between the perceptions of professionals from both civil and military teams with different nationalities and different political histories should be carried out in future research.

Unified Modelling Language (UML) has a graphical notation for 13 different types of diagrams and can be used as a general modelling tool. Well-known examples of diagram types are class diagrams for modelling classes that can be instanced into objects, state machine diagrams for modelling states in systems and activity diagrams for modelling process flows. A literature survey shows that UML has been used to model concepts and methodologies of risk assessment and risk management. One example is the Coras Framework. The international standard CEI IEC 61882 Hazard and operability (HAZOP) studies describes concepts for investigating and detecting possible hazards in systems. In CEI IEC 6882, guide words like More and Less are applied to system parameters to invoke deviations in the system and assess possible hazards due to the deviation from the design intent. In this paper, we have used UML to model concepts of CEI IEC 61882 Hazards and operability studies. Diagrams of UML were used to show dependencies and relations between parts of the target system and concepts of CEI IEC 61882. Extensions of UML are suggested to better capture and display the concepts of CEI IEC 61882, the results of a HAZOP study and emerging risk. These extensions are referred to as UML for emerging risks (UML-ER).