Next Article in Journal
Relationship between Personality and Learning Goal Orientation Preceding the First Employment
Next Article in Special Issue
Risk-Informed Performance-Based Metrics for Evaluating the Structural Safety and Serviceability of Constructed Assets against Natural Disasters
Previous Article in Journal
Transmission of Place Branding Values through Experiential Events: Wine BC Case Study
Article

Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities?

1
Department of Values and Technology, Technical University, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands
2
BC Hydro, Burnaby, BC V3N 4X8, Canada
3
School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF24 3AA, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Dragan Komljenovic, Georges Abdul-Nour and François Gauthier
Sustainability 2021, 13(6), 3004; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063004
Received: 24 February 2021 / Revised: 4 March 2021 / Accepted: 5 March 2021 / Published: 10 March 2021
Legacy risks from infrastructures and industrial installations often reveal themselves when a potential for failure has been discovered much later than at the stage of the design and construction of a structure. In which case, there might already be a problem with the legacy installation, or even a crisis, without having had an accident. When the hazard cannot be taken away, the question arises as to how much effort, if any, should be spent on improving the situation. The usefulness of the three archetypical approaches to this problem: setting a standard, the as low as reasonably practicable approach and a case-by-case discourse approach are discussed for their applicability for these legacy risks. Although it would be desirable to retrofit legacy risks to previously set legal requirements as is the case when acceptability limits are set in law or demonstration of ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) is demanded, it may be impossible to reduce the residual risk to an otherwise acceptable level without taking away or replacing the infrastructure, which is not acceptable either. Therefore in conclusion the only available solution to persistent legacy risk problems seems to be to have a thorough discussion with all relevant stakeholders until an agreement is in some way found. View Full-Text
Keywords: Norm; ALARP; discourse; cost benefit analysis Norm; ALARP; discourse; cost benefit analysis
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Ale, B.J.M.; Hartford, D.N.D.; Slater, D.H. Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities? Sustainability 2021, 13, 3004. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063004

AMA Style

Ale BJM, Hartford DND, Slater DH. Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities? Sustainability. 2021; 13(6):3004. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ale, Ben J.M., Des N.D. Hartford, and David H. Slater. 2021. "Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities?" Sustainability 13, no. 6: 3004. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063004

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop