Browsing by Author "Kendall, Graham"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A decision support approach for group decision making under risk and uncertainty
    (2010-12-31T00:00:00Z) Li, Jiawei W.; Kendall, Graham; Pollard, Simon J. T.; Soane, Emma; Davies, Graham; Bai, Ruibin
    Cost-benefit analysis has long been used in decision making about public health and security. Frequently, risk and uncertainty are involved, and benefit and cost are not evenly shared by all stakeholders in the activities where public welfare is concerned. The result of cost-benefit analysis may be controversial because it does not consider the conflict of interest among the stakeholders. In this paper, we propose a decision support approach that allows individual agents to make their own evaluations of benefit, cost and risk over available alternatives. Individual beliefs with respect to the alternatives will then be aggregated to form a group decision. This approach can also be used to integrate the cost benefit analysis into risk assessment. An application to this group decision making, considering the disposal of dead animals, is given.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Evidence and belief in regulatory decisions - Incorporating expected utility into decision modelling
    (Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam., 2012-12-31T00:00:00Z) Li, J.; Davies, Gareth J.; Kendall, Graham; Soane, Emma; Bai, R.; Rocks, Sophie A.; Pollard, Simon J. T.
    Recent changes in the assessment and management of risks has had the effect that greater importance has been placed on relationships between individuals and within groups to inform decision making. In this paper, we provide the theoretical underpinning for an expected utility approach to decision-making. The approach, which is presented using established evidence support logic (TESLA™), integrating the expected utilities in the forming of group decisions. The rationale and basis are described and illustrated through a hypothetical decision context of options for the disposal of animal carcasses that accumulate during disease outbreaks. The approach forms the basis for exploring the richness of risk-based decisions, and representing individual beliefs about the sufficiency of evidence they may advance in support of hypothese
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Optimising risk reduction: An expected utility approach for marginal risk reduction during regulatory decision making
    (Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam., 2009-11-30T00:00:00Z) Li, Jiawei W.; Pollard, Simon J. T.; Kendall, Graham; Soane, Emma; Davies, Gareth J.
    In practice, risk and uncertainty are essentially unavoidable in many regulation processes. Regulators frequently face a risk-benefit trade-off since zero risk is neither practicable nor affordable. Although it is accepted that cost-benefit analysis is important in many scenarios of risk management, what role it should play in a decision process is still controversial. One criticism of cost-benefit analysis is that decision makers should consider marginal benefits and costs, not present ones, in their decision making. In this paper, we investigate the problem of regulatory decision making under risk by applying expected utility theory and present a new approach of cost-benefit analysis. Directly taking into consideration the reduction of the risks, this approach achieves marginal cost- benefit analysis. By applying this approach, the optimal regulatory decision that maximizes the marginal benefit of risk reduction can be considered. This provides a transparent and reasonable criterion for stakeholders involved in the regulatory activity. An example of evaluating seismic retrofitting alternatives is provided to demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Regulators as 'agents': power and personality in risk regulation and a role for agent-based simulation
    (Taylor & Francis, 2010-12-31T00:00:00Z) Davies, Gareth J.; Kendall, Graham; Soane, Emma; Li, Jin; Charnley, Fiona; Pollard, Simon J. T.
    We critically examine how evidence and knowledge are brokered between the various actors (agents) in regulatory decisions on risk. Following a precis of context and regulatory process, we explore the role power and personality might play as evidence is synthesised and used to inform risk decisions, providing a review of the relevant literature from applied psychology, agent-based simulation and regulatory science. We make a case for the adoption of agent- based tools for addressing the sufficiency of evidence and resolving uncertainty in regulatory decisions. Referring to other environmental applications of agent- based decision-making, we propose how an agent model might represent power structures and personality characteristics with the attending implications for the brokering of regulatory science. This critical review has implications for the structuring of evidence that informs environmental decisions and the personal traits required of modern regulators operating in facilitative regulatory settings.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Regulators as agents: modelling personality and power as evidence is brokered to support decisions on environmental risk
    (2014-01-01T00:00:00Z) Davies, Gareth J.; Kendall, Graham; Soane, Emma; Li, J.; Rocks, Sophie A.; Jude, Simon R.; Pollard, Simon J. T.
    Complex regulatory decisions about risk rely on the brokering of evidence between providers and recipients, and involve personality and power relationships that influence the confidence that recipients may place in the sufficiency of evidence and, therefore, the decision outcome. We explore these relationships in an agent-based model; drawing on concepts from environmental risk science, decision psychology and computer simulation. A two-agent model that accounts for the sufficiency of evidence is applied to decisions about salt intake, animal carcass disposal and radioactive waste. A dynamic version of the model assigned personality traits to agents, to explore their receptivity to evidence. Agents with 'aggressor' personality sets were most able to imbue fellow agents with enhanced receptivity (with 'avoider' personality sets less so) and clear confidence in the sufficiency of evidence. In a dynamic version of the model, when both recipient and provider were assigned the 'aggressor' personality set, this resulted in 10 successful evidence submissions in 71 days, compared with 96 days when both agents were assigned the 'avoider' personality set. These insights suggest implications for improving the efficiency and quality of regulatory decision making by understanding the role of personality and power.