Päätösanalyysia ja riskinhallintaa
tapausesimerkin kautta
Jouni Tuomisto, Mikko Pohjola
THL
Avoin riskinhallinta: yleiskuva
Q
R
A
Miksi kaupunkitaso on tärkeää
ilmastopolitiikassa?
• Monet käytännön
päätökset
tapahtuvat
kaupunkitasolla
(talousalueen
tasolla).
• Ei välttämättä
kaupunginvaltuusto
päätä, mutta
kaupungin rooli
muutosta tukevana
toimijana.
Energiataseen toiminta
Turvetta
säästyy
Sähköä
tuodaan
Bionesteitä
tuotetaan
Liikenne
vähenee
Energiaa
säästyy
Olennaiset lähtötiedot
energiataselaskentaan
• Energiankäyttö nykytilanteessa (kuvaus):
http://fi.opasnet.org/fi/Energiatase/Kuopio
• Energiankäytön data Opasnet-tietokannassa:
http://fi.opasnet.org/fi/Toiminnot:Opasnet_Base?sm
p=0&op=smp&sr=1&sa=0&id=Op_fi2288
• Energiankäytön ja kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen
laskentamalli:
http://en.opasnet.org/w/Energy_balance
• Käyttäjän itse syöttämät tiedot
• Tiedoista ja mallista käytävä keskustelu:
http://fi.opasnet.org/fi/Keskustelu:Energiatase/Kuopi
o
Ilmastotoimiesimerkki Kuopiossa: 10
kton bionesteitä, 16% lämmönsäästö
Avoimen arvioinnin olennaisia piirteitä
• Kaikki tieto on kaikkien käytettävissä ja
muokattavissa (sääntöjen puitteissa) koko ajan.
• Yksi työtila (Opasnet) kaikelle tiedontuotannolle:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Alkuperäisaineistot ja -analyysit
Tutkimusten tiivistelmät
Yhteiskunnalliset arvot
Vaikutusarvioinnit
Toimenpideanalyysit
Tieteellinen kritiikki ja arviointi
Yhteiskunnallinen keskustelu
Päätelmät ja toimintasuositukset
Avoimen arvioinnin hyödyt
• Yhteiskunnallinen päätöksenteko on aina
monimutkainen yhdistelmä arvoja ja tutkimustietoa.
• Johdonmukainen yhdistäminen ei onnistu
kahvipöydässä (edes eduskunnassa), mutta
avoimella arvioinnilla se onnistuu.
Jakso 1:
•
Esittely aiheeseen: johdatus riskinhallintaan ja
päätösanalyysiin (sisältää pienen harjoituksen)
Mikko Pohjola
• Pääviesti
• Tieto ja toiminnan kompleksisuus: ne kytkeytyvät
yhteen, mikä tekee siitä erityisen vaikeaa mutta se on
kuitenkin mahdollista.
Jakso 2:
• Kuopion ilmastopoliittisen ohjelman (2009-2010)
esittely (Erkki Pärjälä); huomioita ohjelman
käytännön toteuttamisesta (Mikko Pohjola).
– Pääviesti
• Suunnitelmassa kytkentä suunnitellusta toiminnasta ja
todellisesta vaikuttavuudesta kohtaavat huonosti.
Rajoittunut näkemys. Hyvä että voidaan sopia
tavoitteista mutta se ei riitä. Hyvä että ilmastotiede
tuottaa ymmärrystä mutta sekään ei riitä. On myös
tietoa toiminnan todellisista vaikutuksista. Mutta
tarvitaan uskottava ja kattava kytkentä suunnitellusta
toiminnasta tavoitteisiin, jotta se ohjaisi toimintaa.
Jakso 3:
• Tarkastelussa henkilöliikenne ja asuntojen lämmitys:
kuinka paljon saavutettavissa, paljonko syntyy
haittaa, ketkä päättävät? Minkä tiedon pohjalta
toimitaan? Jouni Tuomisto
– Pääviesti
• On katsottava kokonaisenergiatasetta ja sen CO2päästöjä ja terveys- ym. vaikutuksia, ei yksittäisiä
laitoksia tai polttoaineita. Tarkastelua voidaan ja pitää
tehdä joukossa, yhdessä oppien. Tätä varten on tieto
ja mallit jaettava.
Jakso 4:
• Yksin tai ryhmissä etsitään ratkaisuja päivän aikana
esiintyneisiin ilmastokysymyksiin: mitä konkreettisia asioita
voisi edistää? Miten ilmasto-ohjelman jotain tavoitetta
saadaan käytännöllisemmäksi toiminnaksi? Miten tieto
saadaan hyötykäyttöön? Jouni Tuomisto
– Pääviesti
• Kuinka toiminta saadaan aikaiseksi? Miten suunniteltu
toiminta kytketään tavoitteisiin? Miten oikeasti toteutetaan?
• Ryhmätyön/keskustelun kysymykset:
– Millä toimilla voidaan vähentää esim. 20 %
päästöistä/kulutuksesta?
– Millä keinoilla nuo toimet voidaan toteuttaa oikeasti? Mitä
vaikeuksia? Kuinka uskottavaa on, että toteutuisi oikeasti?
– Mitä ympäristö- ja terveysvaikutuksia toimilla olisi? (tai muita:
talous, sosiaaliset ym. vaikutukset)
CO2-päästöjen jakautuminen
Kuopiossa
Kuopion energiansäästötavoitteet
Contents
• Conventional perspectives to risk management
• Open risk management (ORM)
• RM in the swine flu case
– Beginning of the pandemic
– Preparedness in Finland and elsewhere
Conventional perspectives to risk management
Mikko Pohjola, THL
Risk management (of what?)
• Google ”risk management”, what do you find?
– Finance, project, legal, credit, accident, disaster,
terrorism, …
• What we want to find, is environment and health risk
management
– Also several perspectives to this!
• Somewhat related to E&H RM are:
– Workplace health and safety RM
– Engineering safety RM (e.g. nuclear safety)
– World Bank’s social RM (SRM)
Definitions of RM
• Wikipedia:
– Risk management is the identification, assessment,
and prioritization of risks (defined in ISO 31000 as
the effect of uncertainty on objectives, whether
positive or negative) followed by coordinated and
economical application of resources to minimize,
monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of
unfortunate events, or to maximize the realization of
opportunities.
Definitions of RM
• BusinessDictionary.com:
– Policies, procedures, and practices involved in
identification, analysis, assessment, control, and
avoidance of unacceptable risks. A firm may use risk
assumption, risk avoidance, risk retention, risk
transfer, or anu other strategy (or combination of
strategies) in proper management of future events.
RM strategies
• Wikipedia (RM):
– Avoidance
• eliminate, withdraw from or not become involved
– Reduction
• optimize - mitigate
– Sharing
• transfer - outsource or insure
– Retention
• accept and budget
• Wikipedia (SRM):
– Prevention
– Mitigation
– Coping
RM strategies
• STTV (National Product Control Agency for Welfare and
Health):
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Non-acceptance / substitution
Design of packaging (child resistant fastening)
Classification & labeling
Limit of the product volume
Modification of a physical state
Limiting the marketing or use
Instructions, information, warnings
Technical measure (closed system, exhaust ventilation, …)
Training
Medical surveillances
Personal protective equipment (gloves, filters, covers,…)
Presentation by J. Räisänen, STTV. 8.11.2006. Introduction to environmental risk
assessment. Kuopio.
Conventional frameworks for E&H RM
• Several perspectives exist, e.g.:
– EHRM framework
– NRC
• Red book RA, Understanding risk, Science and
decisions
–
–
–
–
–
–
IRGC risk governance framework
REACH
YVA - regulatory EIA in Finland
Water resources management (integrated modelling)
Ecological RA/RM
Risk analysis
EHRM framework
The Presidential /
Congressional
comission on Risk
Assessment and
Risk Management:
Final Report Volume
1, 1997.
EHRM framework
• Risk management is the process of identifying,
evaluating, selecting, and implementing actions
to reduce risk to human health and to
ecosystems.
• The goal of risk management is scientifically
sound, cost-effective, integrated actions that
reduce or prevent risks while taking into
account social, cultural, ethical, political, and
legal considerations.
EHRM framework
• Risk is defined as the probability that a substance or
situation will produce harm under specified
conditions. Risk is a combination of two factors:
– The probability that an adverse event will occur (such
as a specific disease or type of injury).
– The consequences of the adverse event.
• Risk encompasses impacts on public health and on
the environment, and arises from exposure and
hazard. Risk does not exist if exposure to a harmful
substance or situation does not or will not occur.
Hazard is determined by whether a particular
substance or situation has the potential to cause
harmful effects.
NRC: Red book
Risk assessment
Observations
Hazard
identification
Extrapolation
Dose-response
assessment
Risk management
Regulatory options
Risk
characterization
Measurements
and population
characteristics
Evaluation of
options
Exposure
assessment
Decisions and
actions
NRC 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Progress.
The National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
NRC: Red book
• Regulatory actions are based on two distinct
elements, risk assessment and risk management.
• Risk assessment is the use of the factual base to
define the health effects of exposure of individuals
or populations to hazardous materials and
situations.
• Risk management is the process of weighing policy
alternatives and selecting the most appropriate
regulatory action, integrating the results of risk
assessment with engineering data and with social,
economic, and political concerns to reach a
decision.
NRC: Red book
• …the risk of cancer and other adverse health effects
associated with exposure of humans to toxic
substances.
• Many decisions of federal agencies in regulating
chronic health hazards… …improvements in
scientific and technologic capability to detect
potentially hazardous chemicals, in changes in
public expectations and concerns about health
protection, and in the fact that the costs and benefits
of regulatory policies fall unequally on different
groups...
NRC: Understanding Risk (Orange
book)
•
•
Role and importance of deliberation
Risk characterization as the link between assessment and
management
Learning and feedback
Public
officials
Natural and
social scientists
Interested and
affected parties
Problem
formulation
Process
design
Selecting
options &
outcomes
Information
gathering
Synthesis
Decision
Implementation
Evaluation
Analysis and deliberation
NRC 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society.
The National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
NRC: Science and decisions (Silver
book)
NRC 2009. Science and
Decisions: Advancing
Risk Assessment. The
National Research
Council. National
Academy Press,
Washington D.C.
NRC: Science and decisions (Silver
book)
• How we deal with risk depends largely on how well we
understand it. The process of risk assessment has been used
to help us understand and address a wide variety of
hazards…
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), other federal
and state agencies, industry, the academic community, and
others in evaluating public-health and environmental
concerns.
• From protecting air and water to ensuring the safety of food,
drugs, and consumer products such as toys, risk assessment
is an important public-policy tool for informing regulatory and
technologic decisions, setting priorities among research
needs, and developing approaches for considering the costs
and benefits of regulatory policies.
IRGC – Risk governance
Management sphere:
Decision & implementation of
actions
Pre assessment
Risk management
Implementation
▪ Option realization
▪ Monitoring & control
▪ Feedback from risk
management practice
Decision making
▪ Problem framing
▪ Early warning
▪ Screening
▪ Determination of
scientific conventions
Communicatio
n
Assessment sphere:
Generation of knowledge
Risk appraisal
Risk assessment
▪ Hazard identification &
estimation
▪ Exposure &
vulnerability assessment
▪ Risk estimation
Concern
assessment
▪ Option identification &
generation
▪ Option assessment
▪ Option evaluation &
selection
▪ Risk perceptions
▪ Social concerns
▪ Socio-economic
impacts
Tolerability & acceptability judgement
Risk evaluation
Risk characterization
▪ Judging tolerability &
acceptability
▪ Need for risk
reduction measures
▪ Risk profile
▪ Judgment of the
seriousness of risk
▪ Conclusions & risk
reduction options
IRGC 2005. Risk
governance –
towards an
integrative approach.
International Risk
Governance Council.
Geneva.
IRGC
• Risk is an uncertain (generally adverse) consequence of an
event or activity with respect to something that humans value.
Risks are often accompanied by opportunities.
• Systemic risks are embedded in the larger context of
societal, financial and economic consequences and are at the
intersection between natural events, economic, social and
technological developments and policy-driven actions. Such
risks are not confined to national borders; they cannot be
managed through the actions of a single sector; they require
a robust governance approach if they are to be adequately
managed. The governance of systemic risks requires
cohesion between countries and the inclusion within the
process of governments, industry, academia and civil society.
IRGC
•
•
•
•
Governance refers to the actions, processes, traditions and institutions by
which authority is exercised and decisions are taken and implemented.
Risk governance deals with the identification, assessment, management and
communication of risks in a broad context. It includes the totality of actors, rules,
conventions, processes and mechanisms and is concerned with how relevant
risk information is collected, analysed and communicated, and how
management decisions are taken. It applies the principles of good governance
that include transparency, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability, strategic
focus, sustainability, equity and fairness, respect for the rule of law and the
need for the chosen solution to be politically and legally feasible as well as
ethically and publicly acceptable.
Risk accompanies change. It is a permanent and important part of life and the
willingness and capacity to take and accept risk is crucial for achieving
economic development and introducing new technologies. Many risks, and in
particular those arising from emerging technologies, are accompanied by
potential benefits and opportunities.
The challenge of better risk governance lies here: to enable societies to
benefit from change while minimising the negative consequences of the
associated risks.
IRGC
IRGC
REACH – EU Chemical safety
Information: available vs. required/needed
▪ Substance intrinsic properties
▪ Manufacture, use, tonnage, exposure, risk management
Exposure assessment
▪ Hazard identification
▪ Classification & labeling
▪ Derivation of threshold levels
▪ PBT/vPvB assessment
▪ Exposure scenarios building
▪ Exposure estimation
no
Iteratio
n
Hazard assessment
yes
Dangerous or
PBT/vPvB
Risk characterisation
yes
Chemical safety report
no
Risk controlled
ECHA 2008. Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety
Assessment. Guidance for the Implementation of REACH.
YVA - regulatory EIA in Finland
Phase 2
Evaluation
program
Statements of
the ministry of
employment
and economy
about the
report
Participation
Phase 1
Opinions and
statements
about the
program
Participation
Statements of
the ministry of
employment
and economy
about the
evaluation
Opinions and
statements
about the
report
Assessment
Evaluation
report
Pohjola et al. State
of the art in benefitrisk analysis:
Environmental
health. Manuscript.
YVA
Jantunen & Hokkanen
2010. YVAlainsäädännön
toimivuusarviointi –
Ympäristövaikutusten
arviointimenettelyn
toimivuus ja
kehittämistarpeet.
Ympäristöministeriö.
Helsinki.
Water resource management
(integrated modeling approach)
Liu et al. 2008.
Linking science
with
environmental
decision
making:
Experiences
from an
integrated
modelling
approach to
supporting
sustainable
water
resources
management.
Environmental
Modelling and
Software,
23:846-858.
Ecological RA/RM
Ecological risk
assessment. Book. ???
Risk analysis
Risk analysis
Lessons from the KTL Centre of excellence in environmental health risk analysis
Risk assessment
Hazard
identification
Exposure
assessment
Doseresponse
assessment
Risk
characterization
Risk management
Options
generation
Options
evaluation
Policy selection &
implementation
Policy effect
evaluation
Does risk analysis pay off?
Risk assessment
management
MillionRisk
euro
cycle
Hazard
identification
Options
generation
Exposure
assessment
Dose-response
assessment
Risk
characterization
Options
evaluation
Policy selection &
implementation
Billion
euro cycle
Risk communication
Policy effect
evaluation
Some RM related concepts
• Risk communication (RC)
– WHO: Risk communication is an interactive process
of exchange of information and opinion on risk
among risk assessors, risk managers, and other
interested parties.
• Risk perception (RP)
– Wikipedia: the subjective judgment that people make
about the characteristics and severity of risks.
• Risk assessment (RA)
• Risk characterisation
• Risk analysis
Discussion points
• Similarities and differences between perspectives?
• Clear? Solid? Unambiguous?
– In comparison e.g. to the theory of DA
• Sufficient?
Different roles in risk management
• Political decision makers (has the decision-making
power)
• Policy makers (develops policies to be decided)
• Scientists, risk assessors in administration, or
consultants working for administration
• Representatives of the industry or business.
• Representatives of NGOs.
• Citizens directly affected by the risk assessment
outcomes.
• Anyone interested.
Questions to ask about RM
• Risk
– what risk(s)?
– how about benefits (costs)?
– whose risks / whose benefits?
• Management:
–
–
–
–
who manages?
manages what?
manages how?
on what basis?
Interim conclusions
• RM: from needs to knowledge, knowledge to action
– a societal knowledge/learning process
• Confused? Don’t worry, we’ll get back to these
issues on the later part of the course…
Open risk management
Jouni Tuomisto, THL
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Some concepts and terms.
Overview of open risk management.
Major questions in risk management.
Need-knowledge-action as the basis of ORM.
Risk management machinery.
Research questions of open risk management and open
assessment.
– Differences and similarities
•
•
•
•
Information structure
Discussion points: Performance, independence of assessors.
Science-policy interface. Why it does not exist.
Boundaries of RA and RM
Definitions of risk and related issues
•
•
•
•
•
Hazard, endanger, exposure to mischange or peril. (Oxford English
Dictionary)
The chance of hazard or commercial loss. (Oxford English Dictionary)
As in Risk-Money, an allowance paid to a cashier to cover accidental
deficits. (Oxford English Dictionary)
Risk = Probability ⊗ Severity (Wilson and Crouch)
Risk = S{Probability ⊗ Severity ⊗ Weight} (Wilson and Crouch)
– ⇤1 However, sometimes risks are not truly multiplicative. (Tversky et
al., 1990)
•
•
Risk: a characteristic of a situation or action wherein two or more
outcomes are possible, the particular outcome that will occur is
unknown, and at least one of the possibilities is undesired.
(Covello and Merkhofer, 1993)
… and there is a need to improve the expectation of the outcome.
(Tuomisto, 2006)
Definition of risk in open risk
management
• In this course and in open risk management, we use
the word risk in a loose/broad sense.
– Risk = any impact (good, bad, neutral, health, money,
fear)
– The probability of risk may be low, high, or even 1.
• Why such a loose definition? Because ORM treats
favourable and harmful, likely and unlikely impacts
all with the same tools and procedures.
• There is no need for separate risk assessment,
benefit-risk assessment, benefit-risk-cost
assessment, cost-benefit assessment, health impact
assessment etc.
Why do we talk about
”Risk management”?
• Indeed, we could use the term ”impact
management” instead of ”risk management”.
• This is just a matter of tradition.
• (But if we had called this course Open assessment
and impact management, the professors hadn’t
been interested in including the course in ToxEn
MSc studies.)
Open risk management: context
• All risks emerge in a society (or group).
• The society observes the risks, valuates them, is
afraid of them, suffers from them, manages them,
and adapts to them.
Important aspects in open risk management
• Problem(s) identified (something wrong in the world)
• Decisions and actions as responses to problems
• Incremental improvements (we do not look for perfect
solutions but better solutions than the current ones).
• Everyone involved as participant as well as actor.
• Decision analysis as one basis after we know what decision
options to evaluate.
• Open assessment/trialogue as one basis as the method to
reach shared understanding.
• Values of people are included.
• The idea of justice as one basis (should be explored more
carefully)
Participation and action in open risk
management
1. Understand your own role and capabilities.
2. Within an open assessment, find a decision that
suits your role as an actor.
3. If you cannot find one, create a new decision into
the assessment.
4. Assess or let other people assess your decision.
5. Act based on the conclusions.
Need – knowledge – action.
Questions in risk management
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
What is the situation or problem?
Who is responsible for the problem?
What are the possible decisions/actions? By whom?
What are the objectives?
What are the outcomes to be monitored?
Who are influenced by the problem?
Who are influenced by the actions?
Which things should be included in an
assessment and why?
Risk management of bus traffic in Kuopio
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
What is the situation or problem?
Who is responsible for the problem?
What are the possible decisions/actions? By whom?
What are the objectives?
What are the outcomes to be monitored?
Who are influenced by the problem?
Who are influenced by the actions?
Which things should be included in an
assessment and why?
Research question for
open risk management
• How can scientific information and value
judgements be organised for improving societal
situations by identifying potential decisions and
relevant outcomes in a situation where open
participation is allowed?
– Emphasis: The decision situation should be clarified.
Research question for
open assessment
• How can scientific information and value
judgements be organised for improving societal
decision-making in a situation where open
participation is allowed?
– Emphasis: The decision situation is clear, focus on
evaluating and choosing good options.
Relation of open risk management and
open assessment
• There is no clear separation between open
assessment and open risk management.
– Open risk management focuses on finding right
questions.
– Open assessment focuses on finding correct
answers to the questions identified.
• Iterative feedback: assessment teaches about better
questions.
– If your decision options are clear (for the moment),
you are more on OA side.
– However, be prepared for surprises and revisiting
your original questions (ORM).
Machinery for open risk management within
a society
1.
2.
3.
A problem or issue emerges or is identified.
Formulate it as a (decision) question or statement.
Perform argumentation about it.
•
•
•
Create hypotheses about answers.
Collect evidence to support hypotheses.
Attack and remove poor hypotheses.
4. Make conclusions.
5. Act based on the conclusions.
From a need (1) to knowledge (2-4) to action (5).
Information structure is always the
same (but the order may differ).
Variable (in a model):
• Scope (question)
• Result (answer)
• Definition (rationale)
Discussion (within
assessments or
variables):
• Statement(s)
• Resolution
(outcome)
• Argumentation
Assessment, management, and
communication
• A traditional view separates
– Risk assessment (by scientists)
– Risk management (by decision-makers)
– Risk communication (by all, but especially to
stakeholders)
• However, in ORM there is no need for separation.
There is no science-policy interface
• The most important tools for making science and
making policy are the same.
• Making artificial separations only confuse and slow
down efficient actions.
• This is not obvious, though. Why?
What are science and policy?
• ”Science is what a scientist does.”
• ”Policy is what a politician does.”
• We know who is a scientist and who is a
politician. We can answer the question by
observation.
• This is a reasonable assumption, if the current way
is the best way to make science and policy. Is it?
What is the key difference between
conventional RM and ORM? Byrocracy.
• Risk management is based on the idea that certain
people have certain roles and authority to decide.
– There are strict rules about procedures.
• Open risk management is based on the idea that
anyone can suggest solutions and ideas, and she is
taken seriously. Stupid ideas are shot down, good
ideas are promoted, and everyone is thanked for
participation.
– The procedure is open and limited mostly by the
structure of the issue and capabilities of the
participants.
The cathedral and the bazaar
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the
_Bazaar
• Centralized vs. decentralized ways of working
• Traditional RM is typically centralized, while ORM is
decentralized.
• If you want to manage risks of the Mission Mars,
you might prefer cathedral.
• However, when managing risks involving everyone
(falling in home, climate change), you should
consider bazaar.
What is the best way to make science and
policy?
• You cannot answer by observing.
– However, you can find problems by observing and
then try to understand why they exist.
• You can start from the ultimate objective and then
try to find efficient methods to reach it.
Independence of assessors?
• How to ensure that science is objective?
• What if assessments are only made to justify
existing decisions?
• Can political pressures be overcome if scientists
step out of the ivory tower?
• This topic will be discussed in more detail in a
decision analysis lecture.
Performance
• How do we know if we succeeded in risk
management?
– Standard procedure leads to qualified outcome.
– Quality control of the outcome product (e.g. peer
review of a risk assessment report).
– Evaluation of changes in action.
• What do we actually aim to achieve?
• This topic will be discussed more later during the
course.
Risk management in the swine flu story
RM in the swine flu story
• Independent exploration
– Beginning of the Pandemic
– Prepredness in Finland and elsewhere
• Mini-presentations and discussions
• Summary
Risk management exercise
• It is the evening of 29th April, 2009. WHO has just “…
decided to raise the current level of influenza pandemic alert
to phase 5. Influenza pandemics must be taken seriously
precisely because of their capacity to spread rapidly to every
country in the world.”
• The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health establishes an
influenza expert panel.
• You are nominated as a member because you are an expert
in decision analysis and risk management.
• How would you describe the context? What is the situation?
What issues do you consider? What are your immediate
conclusions?
• Find background information in groups during the first
afternoon lecture. Present your conslusions to others at
14.15.
Questions in risk management
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
What is the situation or problem?
Who is responsible for the problem?
What are the possible decisions/actions? By whom?
What are the objectives?
What are the outcomes to be monitored?
Who are influenced by the problem?
Who are influenced by the actions?
Which things should be included in an
assessment and why?