Purpose of our risk assessments

At HATS, we believe that risk assessment is only as good as its outcomes are useful. Therefore, our approach involves a comprehensive understanding of how the results of a risk assessment will be utilised before embarking on any risk-related endeavours. Drawing from our extensive experiences as risk facilitators, technical advisors, and independent reviewers, we have encountered a myriad of reasons for undertaking risk assessments, including:

• Comparing tailings dam risks across a portfolio or against other hazards in an operation
• Identifying and assessing risks stemming from knowledge gaps
• Prioritising risk control measures
• Verifying that tailings dam risks are tolerable and/or as low as reasonably practicable
• To have a completed risk assessment (a reason more frequently quoted than one might anticipate!)

To clarify, all these objectives align with the definition of risk assessment according to ANCOLD: "Risk assessment is a process that generates information to enable more informed decision-making than can be achieved using the traditional standards-based approach to dam safety alone" (Guidelines on Risk Assessment, 2022).

However, what is crucial is the ability of the risk owner and their supporting teams to articulate the purpose of their risk assessment. Firstly, the outcomes of a risk assessment must unequivocally support the overall objective of the assessment. Unfortunately, instances have been observed where the recipients of a risk assessment were uncertain about how the outcomes contributed to their objectives. The primary culprit? Often, it's the lack of clear articulation of the assessment's objective to the team conducting it.

Defining the objective is not merely about ensuring alignment with outcomes; it is also instrumental in selecting the appropriate scope, methods, and tools for the assessment. Given that risk assessments can be resource-intensive and there is a limited pool of risk assessment practitioners, it is imperative that the chosen methods directly support the intended objective.

For example, if the objective is to evaluate the risk a Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) presents within a corporate framework featuring a 5 x 5 consequence v. likelihood matrix, is it reasonable to employ a fully quantitative assessment yielding a societal risk profile on an F-N plot? Or would a simpler qualitative assessment, aligning with the matrix descriptions, be more suitable in this situation?

The importance of clearly defining the objective extends beyond this. It influences the very fabric of the assessment's methodology. In our upcoming posts, we will delve deeper into other intricate aspects of risk assessments.

Before we conclude, we leave you with a question: What is the purpose of your risk assessment? Look out for the next article in the series, as we unravel more layers of this critical topic.

For those seeking assistance with risk assessments, feel free to reach out to [email protected].