Implementing Sustainably Managed Fisheries Using Ecological Risk Assessment and Bowtie Analysis

Human resource risk control through COVID-19 risk assessment in Indonesian manufacturing

The COVID-19 outbreak that began at the end of 2019 brought a crisis impact on the health sector and other sectors such as the economy, social and politics. Human resource problems that emerged as a result of the pandemic made every company strive to protect employee safety. The food and beverage sector is one of the industries maintained to continue operating despite the large-scale social restrictions imposed in several regions, including an instant food company in East Java. This study aims to identify and determine human resource risk control to support employee productivity during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research used qualitative data based obtained through interviews, observation, and documentation. The method in this study used a combination of Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) and Bow Tie to identify, measure, and anticipate the risk of COVID-19 transmission in the company. The output result of the Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) method is the Risk Priority Number (RPN) score. The three activities with the highest RPN value were health services at the polyclinic, employee meal activities in the canteen, and activities inside and outside the factory. This analysis's results were continued by using the Bow Tie method to identify the causes, prevention, impact, and recovery of these risks. Bow Tie analysis results formed the basis for the preparation of Corrective Action and Preventive Action (CAPA). The risk control of human resources is focused on increasing employee productivity by reducing days lost due to labor shortages. In the end, the study results are expected to become recommendations in the evaluation of risk control and preventive measures for COVID-19 in manufacturing companies.

Operationalizing risk-based cumulative effect assessments in the marine environment

Ecosystem-based management requires an assessment of the cumulative effects of human pressures and environmental change. The operationalization and integration of cumulative effects assessments (CEA) into decision-making processes often lacks a comprehensive and transparent framework. A risk-based CEA framework that divides a CEA in risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation, could structure such complex analyses and facilitate the establishment of direct science-policy links. Here, we examine carefully the operationalization of such a risk-based CEA framework with the help of eleven contrasting case studies located in Europe, French Polynesia, and Canada. We show that the CEA framework used at local, sub-regional, and regional scales allowed for a consistent, coherent, and transparent comparison of complex assessments. From our analysis, we pinpoint four emerging issues that, if accurately addressed, can improve the take up of CEA outcomes by management: 1) framing of the CEA context and defining risk criteria; 2) describing the roles of scientists and decision-makers; 3) reducing and structuring complexity; and 4) communicating uncertainty. Moreover, with a set of customized tools we describe and analyze for each case study the nature and location of uncertainty as well as trade-offs regarding available knowledge and data used for the CEA. Ultimately, these tools aid decision-makers to recognize potential caveats and repercussions of management decisions. One key recommendation is to differentiate CEA processes and their context in relation to governance advice, marine spatial planning or regulatory advice. We conclude that future research needs to evaluate how effective management measures are in reducing the risk of cumulative effects. Changing governance structures takes time and is often difficult, but we postulate that well-framed and structured CEA can function as a strategic tool to integrate ecosystem considerations across multiple sectorial policies.