Every year, environmental problems and risks become more and more relevant not only for society as a whole, but also for individual organizations that are objects of administrative management. Such organizations are divided into two main groups. The first group includes various state authorities, regional and local governments. The second group includes large enterprises of various forms of ownership.

Organizations forming the first and second groups are directly related to environmental risks. Moreover, the subjects of the first group act more as controlling and restraining bodies, and the enterprises of the second group act as potential sources of environmental hazards and threats. However, for both of them, the rational management of environmental risks that they face in their activities is of great importance.

We will try to highlight the main features and methods of managing environmental risks. To do this, it is necessary to first define the concept of “environmental risk”. Unfortunately, such a definition is missing in modern scientific literature. However, based on the main features and distinctive features of the category of environmental risk, this gap can be eliminated.

If we consider environmental risk as the mathematical expectation of the loss function when finding estimates of the parameters of a mathematical model or its structure, then its essence can be determined by at least six particularly important components:

1) the fact of the release of pollutants into the environment or unplanned depletion of natural resources;

2) the volume of the incoming harmful substance;

3) type of pollutant;

4) duration of polluting exposure;

5) time of year;

6) the degree of environmental hazard of this chemical or physical element.

Summarizing the above characteristics, we can formulate the concept of environmental risk. Under environmental risk the potential for environmental damage through accidental release of pollutants or unplanned pathological depletion of natural resources should be understood.

Both the emergency release of pollutants and the unplanned depletion of natural resources can be defined by the term “ecological disaster.”

The essence of environmental risk management is, on the one hand, to prevent the occurrence of environmental disasters, and on the other hand, to minimize their negative consequences.

Prevention of environmental disasters is carried out mainly through:

¦ clear forecasting of the environmental consequences of projects planned for implementation;

¦ development and implementation of environmentally friendly and resource-saving technologies;

¦ economic incentives for business entities that respect the environment;

¦ administrative and legal deterrence of unscrupulous entrepreneurs;

¦ the increasingly widespread use of environmental education and propaganda.

Minimizing the negative consequences of environmental disasters can be achieved through the use of environmental insurance. In foreign practice, this concept most often means insurance of civil liability of owners of potentially dangerous objects in connection with the need to compensate for damage to third parties caused by a technological accident or catastrophe. Its expanded interpretation includes comprehensive general liability, which provides protection for the insured in the event of any claim brought against him seeking compensation for losses resulting from property damage. Insured is the obligation (of a private law nature) of the insured provided for by the law on criminal liability to compensate for damage caused to society, as well as to legal entities and individuals as a result of the impact of harmful substances on land, air, water and other natural resources. Property losses arising from violation of property rights, rights to equipment and production activities and the right to use water space or a certificate of use are insured.

Property liability insurance related to pollution damage originated in the 1960s, when policies aimed to provide coverage for accidents and contingencies, defined as an event involving prolonged or repeated exposure to conditions that result in personal or property damage and are unexpected and unintentional on the part of the policyholder. These policies were essentially a license to pollute.

IN Russian literature There is a slightly different idea of ​​environmental insurance. Its definition should be given on the basis of the characteristics of the features inherent in both processes arising in the environment natural environment under the influence of harmful substances entering it, as well as property insurance and liability insurance operations.

Emergency environmental pollution insurance focuses on risks, the origin of which often cannot be identified, and therefore cannot be assessed and adequately reflected in quantitative indicators. It will probably never be possible to construct an integral indicator of the consequences of emergency pollution that reliably reflects the level of economic losses, and there is no such need. It is necessary to create a methodology acceptable for users (in our case, for insurers and policyholders) for assessing the losses caused to them.

The specificity of emergency pollution or depletion lies in the fact that the consequences of it and the so-called constant anthropogenic pressure on nature are incomparable. At the same time, the continuous flow of harmful substances into the environment in volumes significantly exceeding those temporarily permissible can be classified, based on its negative results, as emergency pollution. This gives grounds to talk about methods for determining the qualitative and numerical characteristics of emergency environmental pollution. However, the probability of a situation in which the impact on natural components fits within the outlined framework cannot be calculated using the information base available today.

There are no statistics on accidents with recorded environmental effects, or perhaps not yet available (which is unlikely). This is primarily due to the lack of a clear concept of an environmental accident. One can give enough examples of accidents and man-made disasters, even the frequency of their occurrence, but there is no methodology for assessing the environmental hazard of a particular production that meets the requirements of environmental insurance.

The main thing in the methodology for assessing the environmental hazard of enterprises and industries should be environmental insurance auditing. It is intended to answer only two, but very important questions:

1) what is the probability of an environmental accident at a specific facility included in the environmental insurance system;

2) what is the magnitude of losses that may be caused by an environmental accident.

There are several methodological approaches to the problem of insurance environmental auditing in its current form.

The danger of industrial production, firstly, is identified by the list of harmful chemicals used in this production in critical quantities, secondly, it is determined by the multiple excess of maximum environmental impact standards, thirdly, it is identified based on the calculated values ​​of the risk of pollution and hypothetical damage caused by it.

The methodology of environmental insurance is characterized by the dissimilarity of views of foreign and domestic researchers on its role in the economic life of society. For the former, it is associated and carried out (rarely) within the framework of property insurance. If it is carried out in the process of liability insurance, then the damage caused to the owner of the property or his health as a result of pollution, and not necessarily an accident, is compensated by the insurance organization. She does this either on the basis of a previously concluded insurance contract, which provides for regular insurance premiums, or at the expense of the culprit identified in the judicial procedure. In both cases, the amount of loss is determined by traditional methods of assessing property losses and lost profits.

In environmental insurance, losses are considered losses caused by the release of a certain amount (in emergency volume) of a harmful substance into the environment from one source and the formation of negative effects in specific recipients. In liability insurance for accidental pollution, the person who causes the harm and the recipient are personified. In property insurance against environmental pollution, the contribution of an individual pollutant is not allocated. It follows that financial coverage of insurance amounts is provided not only from various sources, but also the received insurance premium is used by the insurer for various purposes.

So, environmental insurance, carried out as liability insurance for accidental environmental pollution, is aimed at ensuring environmental safety and compensation for losses of third parties (of course, subject to the commercial interests of the insured), and property insurance is aimed only at compensating for the losses of the insured.

This differs from other types of insurance, such as medical insurance, although it would seem to cover the same circle of persons, called “third parties” in insurance, as the latter. Losses expressed, say, in the loss of public health, are determined in environmental insurance on completely different principles than in medical insurance. In environmental science, it is necessary to identify sources of harm and recipients with maximum reliability and, depending on this, determine tariff and compensation policies. Health insurance is based on different premises: every enterprise that pays wages to its employees bears the financial burden of eliminating losses associated with the disease of the population, regardless of whether this enterprise causes harm. The definition of environmental insurance as insurance of the liability of enterprises - sources of increased environmental danger and property interests of policyholders arising as a result of emergency environmental pollution, providing the possibility of compensation for part of the losses caused by pollution and creating additional sources of financing for environmental protection measures, is focused precisely on the methodological basis about which there was a discussion here. Its main task is additional financial support for environmental safety while respecting the interests of all parties: insurers, policyholders and third parties.

While there is a fairly rich range of regulatory and methodological documentation for property insurance operations, it has yet to be developed for insurance of liability for accidental environmental pollution.

The fact that the need to find new sources of financing for environmental activities today is more acute than ever is clear, as is the fact that so far only private capital has real additional financial reserves. Finding attractive investment areas for him is another function of environmental insurance in the sense in which we understand it.

There is a point of view that the adoption of the Federal Law “On Environmental Insurance” will oblige polluting enterprises to participate in environmental insurance. An obligation not supported by economic feasibility will remain an empty phrase. The law must fit into economic relations and take into account the realities of the insurance business and environmental activities of policyholders.

There are currently several pieces of legislation outlining the limits of polluter liability and the role of insurance in this area.

In Art. 23 of the Law “On Environmental Protection” states that “the Russian Federation carries out... environmental insurance of enterprises, institutions, organizations, as well as citizens, their property and income in the event of environmental and natural disasters, accidents and catastrophes.” Insurance serves not only to make a profit, but also to prevent, eliminate and compensate for harm (in environmental economics the term “damage” is used, in legal practice - “loss”) caused to victims. Here, economic damage is understood as the sum of the costs of preventing the impact of the contaminated environment on recipients (in cases where such prevention, partial or complete, is technically possible) and the costs caused by the impact of the contaminated environment on them. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation legislates: “Losses are understood as expenses that a person whose right has been violated has made or will have to make to restore the violated right, loss or damage to his property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions of civil circulation, if his right had not been violated (lost profits), if the person who violated the right received income as a result, the person whose right was violated may demand compensation, along with other damages, for lost profits in an amount not less than such income."

Thus, theoretically, the amount of the insurance amount consists of the costs of preventing accidental pollution and assessing the impact of the polluted environment on the recipient. For the policyholder, the first represents additional expenses that are unjustified in the absence of environmental insurance during the validity period of the contract. For society and third parties in whose favor an insurance contract for liability for accidental environmental pollution is concluded, such costs are part of the potential losses. Realizing this and assessing the possible insurance compensation, the insurer either allocates funds to prevent accidents or forces (economically stimulates) the policyholder to take environmental protection measures. They can either be carried out or taken into account in calculating the sum insured.

The second component of the insured amount is losses resulting from the impact of harmful substances released into the environment on recipients. Unlike the first type of losses, they also occur to third parties. In both cases, environmental insurance acts as insurance of liability for emergency pollution of the environment by sources of increased environmental hazard.

Losses from accidental pollution are suffered not only by recipients - third parties in whose interests liability insurance is carried out, but also by the insurers themselves - sources of pollution, who are also recipients. Insurers can be both.

In this regard, the differentiation of the compensation policies of insurers was discussed above. Thus, by compensating for losses of a source of accidental pollution within the framework of property insurance, the insurer does not create an interest for the policyholder in preventing pollution. By indemnifying the losses of recipients - third parties, it frees the insurer - the emitter of pollution - from the need to eliminate the consequences and prevent a future accident.

A special role in monitoring the behavior of the policyholder is assigned to tariff rates for environmental insurance. They cannot be established uniformly not only, for example, for the sectors of production of the insured, but even for individual enterprises. The same applies to liability limits for environmental pollution risks accepted by the insurer.

Theoretical aspects of the relationship between insurers and policyholders in such situations require modeling possible situational solutions and developing an appropriate methodological framework.

The insurance process itself rewards those who minimize future risks and costs to society. As a result, the private market mechanism becomes a regulatory and risk management tool with the potential to significantly reduce environmental damage. The use of such a direct economic incentive can be an effective addition to traditional methods of economic and legal regulation of the relationship between society and nature. So, let us highlight four blocks of fundamental problems in the development of environmental insurance. The first, which determines the essence, place and role of environmental insurance in the economy, gives it, as an element of ensuring the environmental safety of the country, national significance. This factor is the basis of the concept of introducing compulsory environmental insurance.

The second block represents the fundamental provisions of insurance environmental auditing, which allows solving the problems of attributing objects of the insurance field (assessing the degree of environmental hazard of enterprises and industries, the amount of possible losses, etc.).

The third forms the legal space of environmental insurance. In Russia, unlike a number Western countries, there is a real opportunity to create a comprehensive legal framework for the development of environmental insurance. The basis will be the federal law“On environmental insurance” and the corresponding methodological and instructional documents, which make up the fourth block.

Risk management is carried out to reduce its likelihood. Early anticipation of risk and timely adoption of measures to reduce it (increase its security) is risk management. Risk management is understood as the process of rational distribution of costs to reduce various types of risk, ensuring the achievement of such a level of safety of the population and the natural environment that is only achievable in the economic and social conditions existing in a given society.

Risk management stages:

Description of environmental risk

Definitions of acceptable level of risk

Selection of necessary actions for supervision and risk reduction, depending on the ecological state of environmental factors, public health indicators

Cost-benefit analysis of existing risks and planned measures to monitor, prevent and reduce them

Determination of priorities, depending on the description of risk factors

Making decisions to prevent, monitor and reduce environmental risks

Implementation of decisions

Control over the implementation of these decisions is carried out by Gos.Ekol. Inspections

Summing up the results obtained

There are three methods for managing environmental risks

1. Risk Prevention Method , is based on environmental risk control and can be carried out in the following ways:

Preventing risk situations by eliminating all its prerequisites

Reducing environmental costs by complying with all environmental regulations

Transfer of control over environmental risks, through the transfer of ownership rights to companies that pollute the environment, as well as the transfer of risk responsibility to others, especially insurance companies

2. Environmental risk compensation method, refers to an activity that has already occurred and caused damage that must be repaired.

3. Environmental risk insurance method , includes self-insurance. Aimed at creating insurance coverage in case of damage to policyholders as a result of sudden excess pollution of the environment (land, water or air). Compensation for damage is possible only in the form of monetary amounts.

Topic 3

Environmental subsidies

The economic mechanism for environmental protection includes a set of tools for managing natural resources that affect the costs and income of users and polluters of environmental resources.

System of economic instruments for environmental protection

activities include:

Tax policy;

Subsidies and preferential lending;

Accelerated depreciation of environmental funds;

Sale of rights to pollute;

Using the “deposit-return” principle;

Payments for pollution and waste disposal.

Environmental subsidy – This is a payment or tax benefit intended for the purchase of environmental equipment or the implementation of environmental measures. Unlike taxes and fines, which are a tool for punishing polluters, subsidies are intended to encourage their environmental activities. They can come in the form of direct payments, subsidies, tax breaks and loans with a reduced interest rate. Environmental subsidies come in two main forms: a subsidy for the purchase of environmental equipment and a subsidy per unit of pollution reduction.

Types of environmental subsidies:

Free benefits for foreign grants and budget donations

Loans for a long repayment period

Loans with low interest rates

Subsidizing interest payments on bank loans

Environmental tax cuts for certain pollutants

Reduction for some tax categories

Additional income from restructuring the tax system in an unfavorable environmental area

Loan guarantees (commercial loans) for polluters who are not responsible for only a portion of the costs of cleanup equipment

Assistance to private polluters that is proportional to the reduction in pollution levels

Exception costs

Sources of subsidies

1. Environmental taxes, collected from owners and polluters of the environment

2. Off-budget environmental funds

3. International credit institutions that finance programs and environmental projects

4. The state budget is referred to when the amount of taxes collected is less than the costs spent on disinfection, maintenance and improvement of environmental factors

5. Local budgets and funds

6. Commercial banks and other financial and banking institutions

7. Voluntary funds

From international lending institutions that provide environmental subsidies can be distinguished: World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, European Investment Bank.

Benefits of environmental subsidies.

A double effect is achieved - the rhythm of product growth is maintained to meet consumer needs, especially those products that have a low degree of substitution (food products, certain metals, etc.), as well as the maximum reduction or elimination of environmental damage.

Flaws

The main disadvantage of subsidies is that they discourage the costs of internalizing environmental pollution or overuse.

Subsidies are expensive and require funds that are often not reimbursed, increasing several times the difference between marginal social and marginal private costs, negative environmental externalities

Attraction large quantity economic agents, subsequently the volume of pollution increases and the costs of further recovery environment

Poor incentives for new technical innovations

Subsidies mean the possibility of pollution, the use of natural resources within unacceptable limits

The distribution of subsidies requires the development of regulations that should ensure proper control over their use, constant control over non-governmental organizations for the protection of the environment and the local population.

Subventions-a type of state financial benefit to local authorities or individual sectors of the economy, provided for certain purposes free of charge

Subventions – these are some amounts of funds that are allocated from the highest level budget by decision government agency authorities on a free and irrevocable basis to the lower level budget. However, these amounts of money must be spent for specific purposes.

Related information.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Good work to the site">

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Course work

by discipline:

"Technogenic systems and environmental risk"

« Environmental risk management at the Astrakhangazprom enterprise»

Introduction

Any production activity is associated with certain risks - financial, natural, environmental, political, transport, property, production, trade, commercial, investment, risks associated with the purchasing power of money, inflation and deflation, currency, liquidity risks, lost profits, reduction in profitability, direct financial losses, interest, credit, exchange, selective, etc. Technogenic and environmental risks are of greatest interest in environmental practice.

Environmental risk is the likelihood of negative environmental changes or the consequences of these changes arising as a result of negative anthropogenic impact on the environment (Zakharova, 2003).

Every enterprise and manufacturer has technogenic and environmental risks, which necessitates their analysis, accounting and management. When managing environmental and man-made risks, a whole range of problems related to regulating the effects of exposure on humans and the environment are solved.

Environmental risk management has recently become a very pressing issue, as it is aimed at protecting the well-being of society and the well-being of the natural environment.

The purpose of this work: to consider the main methods of risk management.

Job objectives:

1. Define the concept of risk and classification of risks.

2. Provide a description of the main management methods.

3. Consider the risk management methods used at the Astrakhangazprom enterprise.

1. The concept of risk - a new approach to Russian environmental policy

1.1 Risk classification

Environmental risk is the likelihood of negative environmental changes or the consequences of these changes arising as a result of negative anthropogenic impact on the environment.

Environmental risk, as one of the types of risk, can be classified based on the basic classification of risks, by the scale of manifestation, by the degree of admissibility, by forecasting, by the possibility of prevention, by the possibility of insurance. Based on the causes of occurrence, the following classification of environmental risks can be presented:

1) Natural and environmental risks - risks caused by changes in the natural environment.

2) Technical and environmental risks - risks caused by the emergence and development of the technosphere.

3) The risk of sustainable technogenic impacts is the risk associated with environmental changes as a result of normal business activities.

4) The risk of catastrophic impacts is the risk associated with environmental changes as a result of man-made disasters, accidents, and incidents.

5) Social and environmental risks - risks caused by the protective reaction of the state and society to the aggravation of the environmental situation.

6) Environmental and regulatory risk - a risk caused by the adoption of environmental laws and regulations or their constant tightening.

7) Ecological and political risk - risk caused by environmental protests.

8) Economic and environmental risks - risks caused by financial and economic activities.

Based on the classification of environmental risks, it is possible to identify entities whose activities are a source of increased danger to the environment, and take measures to prevent the realization of risks and to protect the object from the impact of environmental risk factors (Korobkin, 2000).

1.2 Brief description of risk analysis methods

Currently, the methodology for quantitative risk assessment, originally developed for nuclear energy, is increasingly used in other areas of human activity. This is a rather complex methodology that, when modern level development of science and technology can already be mastered by most countries of the world. At the same time, to improve the methodology and expand the scope of its application, it is necessary to strengthen research and development activities to accumulate a database on the probability of certain events, on dose-effect functions, and algorithmic methods for describing complex technical systems and natural events. The construction of a unified risk analysis methodology is a complex socio-economic problem. One of its most important features is that its solution is determined by the nature of the interaction of economic, social, environmental and demographic factors that characterize the development of a particular society. It is necessary to take into account that the development of technology, aimed at increasing the material standard of living, simultaneously leads to the emergence of certain types of danger, both for human health and for the environment. To eliminate these types of dangers of technogenic origin, it is necessary to spend a certain share of the material resources of society, which, regardless of how large or small they are, are limited. Disproportionately large costs for improving industrial safety mean that, in conditions of limited resources, it will be necessary to abandon the accelerated development of the social and cultural spheres, material resources, education and upbringing, etc. Along this path, society will accumulate economic and social problems, which can ultimately lead to a decrease in security in society and even to the limit of the stability of the entire social system. In this regard, the problem of optimal distribution of limited material resources to reduce the risk from certain types of hazards to which humans and the environment may be exposed becomes important in the problem of ensuring safety. Risk assessment usually involves analyzing the risk of a hazard source and measuring this hazard in terms of the level of consequences of exposure to humans and the environment. Due to the fact that methods for quantitative risk assessment are not sufficiently developed for the existing wide range of hazard factors, a system of hazard indicators can be adopted as a temporary quantitative expression. When managing risk, a whole range of problems related to regulating the effects of exposure on humans and the environment are solved, and the main ways to solve them are methods of analyzing the effectiveness of measures (economic and administrative) to reduce the magnitude of effects to a certain level. As a rule, the analysis methods “risk-benefit”, “cost-benefit”, “cost-effectiveness” and some other special methods are used. To obtain a quantitative risk assessment, it is necessary to have sufficiently powerful tools in the form of complexes of calculation codes based on databases that summarize accumulated information about possible scenarios for the behavior of the system under consideration under various boundary and initial conditions. In addition, there must be knowledge bases and databases on the mechanisms of distribution, entry into the human body and exposure to biologically hazardous substances and compounds, as well as calculated risk management programs for the economic efficiency of measures and measures to reduce risk. Thus, such a “toolkit” for risk analysis should include at least three groups of calculation methods and programs with the necessary databases:

1) methods and programs for probabilistic assessment of the paths of occurrence and development processes of undesirable events (accidents, natural disasters and catastrophes);

2) methods and programs that describe the consequences of undesirable events, for example, the release, behavior and distribution of hazardous substances in the environment and the mechanisms of damage to the human body by these substances;

3) methods and calculation programs for assessing economic damage and optimizing the expenditure of funds to prevent or reduce the consequences of undesirable events.

To date, the country has created some scientific potential in this area. There are mathematical models and calculation programs for numerical simulation of the processes of distribution of various substances in the atmosphere (gases, aerosols, radionuclides) and aquatic environments. Some experience has also been accumulated in assessing the behavior of various classes of pollutants in ecosystems, their accumulation and impact on public health. There are methods based on the implementation of another approach, which can also be conditionally described as “from the security object.” In this case, man and nature are put in first place, which impose restrictions independent of the source of danger, based on the principles of acceptability and sustainable long-term development. The source of impact is a system of restrictions, which essentially defines the permissible space of man-made impacts within which the very existence of a potentially dangerous object is possible. The proposed scheme is the basis of the methodology and methods of the theory of human and natural security in risk analysis. Thus, an independent examination of the safety of humans, society and the environment should be highlighted as a separate element, in which the basic elements are the criteria for the safety of humans, society and the environment. The introduced criteria must be determined in a way independent of the risk analysis scheme based on the most general goals of the development of society, its safety, the protection of the natural environment, the principles of acceptability of technogenic impact and the principles of long-term sustainable development of civilization. Risk analysis for humans and the environment in in a broad sense(using the principles of sustainable long-term development of civilization) is essentially the subject of research into the theory of human, social and environmental security. According to the principle of anthropocentrism present in the practice of managing impacts on natural objects, according to which: people are protected, nature is protected, for many years natural objects were not considered at all and the only object for analysis was man. Lately, we sometimes hear other extreme statements: if nature is protected, people are protected. There are certain grounds for such statements, but sufficiently strong evidence for this thesis does not currently exist. In the proposed approach, humans and the natural environment are considered as independent objects that must be ensured in terms of safety in accordance with their internal criteria. It follows from this that both people and nature must be protected (Buyanov, 2002).

1.3 Objects of risk analysis and safety criteria

The objects that risk analysis is aimed at protecting are: people; animals; plants; ecosystems; functions and properties of the environment. The impacts considered in this regard are those affecting: health (death, disease, genetic changes, nuisance, both for individuals and for populations of plants and animals in ecosystems); economics (loss of environmental functions, corrosion, inefficient use of land, damage to property, loss of livestock and crops); the well-being of society and the well-being of the natural environment, which cannot always be expressed directly in quantitative terms (decreased quality of life due to lack of landscape diversity, loss of recreation areas, etc.). When assessing hazards, impacts are always subject to significant uncertainty. Risk analysis methodology began to develop in the world more than 20 years ago. It must be remembered that the influence of any influences may become obvious only after a significant period of time. Examples of such situations include the accumulation of harmful substances, the development of cancer, or genetic effects that appear long after exposure. Protecting well-being aims not only to protect individuals, but also to prevent disruption of social equilibrium and the well-being of ecosystems. Such risks and hazards can also be expressed in appropriate indicators and used in risk assessment and management (Medvedev, 2002).

For each allocated security object, it is necessary to introduce a system of security criteria (not necessarily hierarchical), which will be the basis for judging the degree of security and its acceptability for a given level. A set of such criteria, in turn, will be the basis for the development of safety criteria at the next, lower level, the role of which is currently performed by norms, rules, and regulations. Here we can already trace the hierarchical structure: each criterion of a lower level is a consequence of a criterion of a higher level. One of the tasks that arises in risk analysis is the establishment of quantitative risk indicators. When conducting a risk analysis, it is recommended to use the following values ​​as criteria: the maximum permissible risk (limit level), which should not be exceeded, regardless of economic or social type activities; can be specified as a consequence of a system of safety criteria; the area of ​​risk acceptability, within which the search for optimal economic solutions for security systems or measures is carried out. Sometimes the negligible risk value is also used. Negligible risk is a level below which further reduction of risk is pointless, due to the fact that people and the environment are already exposed to other risks arising from the very nature of society and the environment. Currently, the level of negligible risk is often used as 1% of the maximum permissible (Akimova, 2001).

1.4 Basic provisions of the methodology for assessing environmental risk caused by chemical pollution

The key link of this methodology is human health and its protection from the inevitable risk associated with exposure to toxic substances, wherever they are: in water, air, soil.

The concept of risk includes two elements - risk assessment (Risk Assessment) and risk management (Risk Management). Risk management is a logical extension of risk assessment and determines the administrative and legal measures that govern decisions to reduce risk.

Risk assessment is a scientific analysis of the genesis and extent of risk in a specific situation. A risk to human health (or ecosystem) associated with environmental pollution arises under the following necessary and sufficient conditions:

1) the existence of a source of risk (a toxic substance in the environment or food, or an enterprise producing products containing such substances, or a technological process, etc.);

2) the presence of this source of risk in a certain dose or concentration harmful to human health;

3) human exposure to the said dose of the toxic substance.

The listed conditions together form a real threat or danger to human health.

This structuring of the risk itself allows us to identify the main elements (or stages) of the risk assessment procedure. There are four main stages in total:

The first - hazard identification - includes taking into account all chemicals that pollute the environment, determining the toxicity of a chemical to humans or the ecosystem. For example, using basic research data, it can be established that the temporary or permanent presence of a certain substance can cause adverse effects: carcinogenesis, disruption of reproductive function and genetic code in humans, or exacerbation of an environmental problem with subsequent negative consequences for human health.

At this stage of the risk assessment procedure, the analysis is carried out at a qualitative level.

The second stage - exposure assessment - is an assessment of in what ways and through what media, at what quantitative level, at what time and for what duration of exposure real and expected exposure takes place; it is also an estimate of the doses received, if available, and an estimate of the number of persons for whom such exposure appears likely to occur.

Thus, not only the level of exposure is assessed, but also the time factor, which provides grounds for indirect judgment about the dose received, even if it cannot be determined directly (for example, using a chemical analysis of blood or other biological media).

The size of the exposed population is one of the most important factors for deciding the priority of ocher measures, which arises when using the results of a risk assessment for the purposes of “risk management”.

Ideally, exposure assessment is based on actual data from monitoring pollution of various environmental components (atmospheric air, indoor air, soil, drinking water, food). However, this approach is often not feasible due to high costs. In addition, it does not always allow one to assess the relationship of pollution to a specific source and is not sufficient to predict future exposure. Therefore, in many cases, various mathematical models of the dispersion of atmospheric emissions, their deposition on soil, the diffusion and dilution of pollutants in groundwater and/or open water bodies are used. Based on monitoring results or model data of this kind, sometimes biokinetic mathematical models are also used to assess the accumulation of: a toxic substance in the human body (for example, the concentration of lead in the blood of children of different ages) taking into account all routes of entry.

The third stage - assessing the dose-effect relationship - is a search for quantitative patterns linking the received dose of substances with the prevalence of a particular adverse effect, i.e. with the likelihood of its development.

Similar patterns are usually revealed in toxicological experiments. However, extrapolating them from a group of animals to the human population is associated with too many uncertainties. Dose-response relationships based on epidemiological data are more reliable, but have their own areas of uncertainty. For example, when constructing some response dependency high levels exposure (mainly occupational), its extrapolation to a range of lower levels may be erroneous; the dependence found for one human population is not obligatory; it is valid for another, which has some genetic or other differences, is exposed to a different set of factors accompanying the exposure being studied, etc.

The danger of deterioration in health due to negative changes in the environment and living conditions can be quantified on the basis of theoretical calculations, as well as statistical data from the results of medical and environmental surveys.

Both theoretical calculations and estimates based on statistical material are carried out according to the “dose-effect” scheme. The dose here is understood as a quantitative measure of the harmful effect on the body, the effect is the pathological and other consequences of this effect.

In principle, this scheme is acceptable for all types of living organisms: humans, animals, birds, inhabitants of the aquatic environment, plants and microorganisms. However, it finds its greatest practical application in assessing the deterioration of human health.

The effects of pollutants always depend in some way on the amount of pollutant or its dose in the body. The dose size, in turn, depends on the route of entry into the body. Pollutants can have different effects depending on whether they are inhaled (inhalation), through water and food (oral), or absorbed through the skin, or exposure occurs through external exposure.

Dose-response curves characterize the relationship between the dose of a pollutant and the response (effect of the body).

Threshold effects of exposure to pollutants or other man-made factors are characterized by the fact that some quantities of a pollutant below a certain concentration level - a threshold - do not cause any negative consequences for public health. The functions of the body's response to exposure above the threshold level, as a rule, have an S-shape and are characterized by the LD 50 dose or LC 50 concentration.

Rice. 1. Possible forms of dose-effect relationships

Curve 1 (Fig. 1) shows that if such an S-shaped dependence of the effect on the dose occurs, then no changes in the metabolism of the human body are observed until a critical concentration or dose is reached. This critical value is called the practical threshold and is designated PP. The PP characterizes the boundary of a statistically recorded effect when the latter exceeds the fluctuation of the existing background level of effects.

The figure also shows the four main shapes of possible curves under the action of specific chemical pollutants and other man-made factors and the reaction (response) of the body. Curves 2, 3 and 4 refer to non-threshold dependencies. It is assumed that there are effects (which, however, cannot always be registered) at any finite concentration of the pollutant or at any small non-chemical impact. Such curves reflect primarily a class of stochastic health effects.

The most widely used is the linear non-threshold form of the dose-effect relationship, since often judgments about the form of the dose-effect relationship in the region of low dose values ​​are obtained through linear extrapolation from the region of high doses.

Curve 4 - a nonlinear dose-effect relationship with a downward convexity - is also characteristic of the body's response to the action of many factors. This is sometimes called a “sublinear” dose-response relationship. Although curve 4 does not have a clearly defined threshold, the point on the dose axis at which the effect can be recorded determines the practical value of the PP.

Occupational exposure limit guidelines are often based on sets of PP values ​​with certain “safety” factors that define occupational exposure dose limits. Curve 2 - a non-linear relationship, a “dose-response” with an upward convexity - represents the so-called “supra-linear” relationship, which is observed when small doses cause disproportionately large effects.

Along with the “dose-effect” function, the “exposure-effect” relationship can also be used when assessing risk. Here, exposure refers essentially to the level of technogenic impact, expressed through the concentration (amount) of a solid substance in a particular environment, for example, in air, water. It is more convenient to use such a concept as concentration when assessing risk, since its value can be measured or quite simply calculated. However, there are certain limitations. The fact is that the dose, which is the main parameter on which damage to human health ultimately depends, is far from unambiguously related to concentration. At a certain level of exposure, characterized, for example, by the concentration of substances in the air, the dose depends on the rate of respiration, the nature of the metabolic and pharmacological processes in which the harmful substance is involved, and on other factors. The dose may not be determined directly by the substances contained in the consumed air or water, but by their metabolites.

Finally, the final stage is the result of the previous stages - risk characterization, including an assessment of possible and identified adverse health effects; establishing a hazard ratio for the development of general toxic effects, analyzing and characterizing the uncertainties associated with the assessment, and summarizing all information on risk assessment.

Risk assessment is one of the basis for decision-making on the prevention of adverse effects of environmental factors on public health, and not the decision itself in finished form, i.e. represents a necessary but not sufficient condition for decision making. Other necessary conditions for this are the analysis of non-risk factors, comparing them with risk characteristics and establishing between them and risk characteristics and establishing appropriate proportions (control proportions) between them - are included in the risk management procedure. Decisions made on this basis are neither purely economic, focusing only on economic benefits, nor purely medical-ecological, pursuing the goal of eliminating even minimal risk for human health or ecosystem stability without regard to costs. In other words, a comparison of medical-ecological (or socio-ecological) and technical-economic factors provides the basis for answering the question of the degree of risk acceptability and the need to make a regulatory decision limiting or prohibiting the use of a particular substance.

In assessing environmental risk, two ways are possible: determining the probabilistic characteristics of environmental hazard theoretically using formulas or based on processing environmental monitoring data based on the frequency of occurrence of certain negative changes in the environment, depending on the type of environmental risk being determined (Anoshkina, 2006).

1.5 Planning and applying risk mitigation measures

The planning and application of risk reduction measures is aimed at maintaining acceptable levels of risk and, if possible, achieving a state of minimal risk within the acceptable range. In general, we can say that the use of risk methodology in the decision-making process on specific projects or comprehensive regional analysis allows: to determine priority directions for regional development strategies, to effectively invest in those projects that optimize the level of security of the region; take into account comprehensively all types of risks existing in the region for the population and the environment created as a result of emissions from enterprises during normal operation and the occurrence of abnormal and emergency situations, transportation of materials, burial and disposal of waste, natural hazards, etc.; carry out a systematic analysis of the strategy for managing the state of the environment and public health, taking into account engineering, social, economic, environmental, organizational and legislative aspects. The risk analysis process in developing a risk management strategy includes the following procedures: examination of existing health and environmental risks in large industrial areas, identification of priority risks that need to be managed or reduced; development of integral risk management strategies for the population and the environment, which is based on the following principles:

1) identification of all sources of risk to public health and the environment in the region;

2) analysis and ranking of risk sources, taking into account the extent of damage to the population and the environment;

3) development of proposals for effective risk reduction based on a generalized analysis of the costs of reducing risk and the benefits of reducing actual or possible damage;

4) optimization of material costs taking into account social factors and creation of an integrated system for managing industrial and natural risks in the region;

5) forecasting the state of the environment when planning strategies for industrial development of regions, optimizing measures to ensure acceptable levels of public safety and environmental protection;

6) optimization of transportation of hazardous substances and materials;

7) licensing of production facilities that have an impact on the environment;

8) development of legislative, regulatory and other documents regulating the activities of hazardous industries.

Decision makers are often faced with complex problems arising from economic and social reasons. It is necessary that the health of the population is not exposed to excessive danger due to emissions into the environment and other impacts of industrial enterprises or in the event of natural disasters, so that the well-being of ecosystems, the well-being of society, and the purity of the natural environment are preserved (Kuzmin, 1998).

2 Environmental risk management

2.1 General concepts of risk management

With the development of civilization, technology, and the increasing role of the human factor, the importance of risk management only increases. Risk management also affects the efficiency of the operation and system, as well as managing the achievement of the target effect and resource management, which allows us to consider risk management as one of the components of the overall organizational management process.

It is equally important for an enterprise to manage political, financial, technological, and personnel risks, ensure fire safety, manage actions in emergency situations, environmental protection, etc.

Risk management must be integrated into the overall organizational process and must have its own strategy, tactics, and operational implementation. It is noted that it is important not only to manage risks, but also to periodically review the measures and means of such management. High efficiency of resource expenditure when implementing a risk management program can only be ensured within the framework of a systematic approach. This approach in risk management is the most common.

Risk management becomes relevant once a risk problem is identified. In this case, the results of risk analysis and modeling should be used.

In general, in relation to risk, as a probable failure, the following control actions are possible: prevention, reduction, damage compensation, absorption. Prevention (elimination) is the elimination of a source of risk as a result of targeted actions of the risk subject. There are two approaches to risk prevention: broad and narrow. The narrow approach consists of preventing risk through specific activities carried out at the expense of insured amounts and at the initiative of the insurer.

The broad approach is implemented outside the insurance framework. Risk reduction (control) is the reduction in the likelihood of a risk source occurring as a result of the actions of risk subjects. Risk reduction can be carried out using various methods, including through the use of methods such as diversification, securitization, and limiting. Diversification - distribution of risk between several objects, areas of activity, etc.

Securitization is the division of a lending operation into two parts (development of loan terms and conclusion of an agreement; lending) with the implementation of each of these parts by different banks.

Limitation - setting limits on investments, batches of goods purchased, loans issued, etc.

Financial engineering is the use of financial derivatives to manage risks.

Abroad, it is believed that financial engineering has already become sufficiently established as a separate financial specialty. At the same time, well-known foreign research risk management methods leave out of sight such important areas as the use of special forms of transactions (factoring, letter of credit, etc.), the use of an organizational and legal form to reduce the risk of a market entity, etc. This made it possible to highlight non-fund insurance. In the non-fund form of insurance, insurance costs are included in the price during the initial price distribution.

Non-stock insurance is a closed relationship between participants in a commercial transaction or project to reduce possible damage by reducing the vulnerability of risk objects through specially designed financial instruments, types of transactions, performance of roles, etc. At the same time, it seems possible to assume that if stock insurance is a product of protective risk function, then non-fund insurance is a product of a constructive stimulating risk function. Fund insurance is more economically feasible if measures to prevent and reduce risk are not effective enough and/or are expensive.

Insurance (stock insurance) is the redistributive closed relationship of participants in an insurance contract in monetary form regarding compensation for damage. Self-insurance is the assumption of risk, the creation by the risk subject of a special fund to compensate for a probable loss. Risk absorption is the acceptance of risk without additional measures of prevention, mitigation or insurance. It is necessary to make a fundamental distinction between self-insurance and refusal to insure without taking any measures (risk absorption). Often they go to absorb risk if a large state or municipal enterprise has the ability to include most of the losses in operating expenses.

Risk absorption is typical for the current socio-economic situation in Russia for the following main reasons:

1) lack of financial resources for insurance for both legal entities and individuals;

2) the relative unreliability of some insurers in conditions of political instability, inflation, and the lack of profitable and reliable investment instruments.

These circumstances make risk management especially relevant for entrepreneurs. Risk management should be considered at hierarchical levels: the state and its subsystems (political, social, regional, sectoral), financial and industrial groups and holdings, enterprises, families and citizens.

The risk management process includes goal setting, marketing, and management.

Risk-goal setting in risk management is the process and result of choosing the best goal in risk management, taking into account available resources and the limitations of the current socio-economic and market situation.

Risk marketing is the choice of methods and tools for risk management for certain management purposes, taking into account real-life restrictions on the use of constructive, technological, organizational (occupational health and safety), financial instruments available to the risk subject in a particular situation. Risk management is maintaining a balance between resources, people, goals in the process of achieving certain risk goals using constructive, technological, organizational (occupational health and safety) and financial instruments found in the process of risk marketing.

Risk management, like any management, must include planning, motivation, organization and control. It is important to remember that risk management is both a science and an art. The more original the project, the greater the role of art in risk management. Therefore, the effectiveness of risk management can be increased not only through the use of scientific methods, but also through the creative success of the risk subject. Essential for risk management is the fact that the subject, and sometimes the object of such management, as a rule, is in a stressful state.

Risk management is possible both in the direction of increasing possible gains and in the direction of reducing possible losses (Glushchenko, 1999).

2.2 Systematic approach to risk management

Due to the increasing complexity of the conditions of production and economic activity, the growing variety of sources and possible consequences of the claim, they must be considered in a systematic connection with other factors and parameters of the economic and production activities of market entities. The need for a systematic approach is also associated with the growing costs of control and risk management at all hierarchical levels (state, enterprise, individual). These expenses reduce the efficiency of social production and can also affect the socio-economic situation in the country.

A systematic approach to risk management is based on the fact that all phenomena and processes are considered in their systemic connection, and the influence of individual elements and decisions on the system as a whole is taken into account. A systematic approach can be expressed in the following:

1) the goal of ensuring operational safety should be systemic parallel protection of geopolitical, political, social, economic, financial processes, protection of the environment, design and technological structures of the economy from excessive (unacceptable) risks. At the same time, safety precautions, labor protection, and conflict management must be used. If it is not possible to ensure a balance of goals when managing risks, then a positive effect will not be achieved. If it is not possible to ensure security in at least one factor, then it will not be possible to ensure security as a whole. For example, if there is no environmental safety, then this alone is enough for the population to feel unprotected;

2) risks (various physical nature and having different sources) associated with one object or operation are considered as a single set of factors influencing the efficiency and consumption of resources; The connection between risk management and the efficiency of systems and the consumption of resources at several hierarchical levels is considered: state; territory; financial and industrial group or holding; an enterprise or entrepreneur without forming a legal entity; family and citizen. A balance must be maintained and provision must be made for the creation or allocation of reserve resources necessary for risk management at various hierarchical levels. If priority is given to risk management at only one of the hierarchical levels, this will reduce security in the risk management system in the state as a whole;

3) risk management measures are considered as a unified system at various stages of the product life cycle (development, production, operation, disposal) and the product development cycle (draft design, technical design, prototypes).

4) measures for preparing, conducting, calculating, and accounting for an operation (transaction) are formed and considered in such a way as to reasonably reduce the risks of this operation. For example, when preparing a transaction, it is necessary to make sure of the solvency of the partners, to highlight provisions in the terms of the transaction that reduce risk (up to the use of non-stock insurance techniques for special types of transactions: letters of credit, factoring, leasing, etc.); when conducting a transaction you need to pay attention Special attention transport risks; When making calculations, factors that can affect the possibility of refusing payment and its timeliness are examined; 5) at the accounting stage, it is important to correctly reflect the obtained financial results, etc.; a set of measures is being developed to limit risk in various cycles of the enterprise (creation, development, maturity, aging; investment, current operations, monetary) in their mutual connection to protect against risks of the enterprise as a whole;

5) a set (set) of actions is determined, united by the goal of increasing the safety of activities through the use of a limited amount of resources distributed in time and space, and operations to prevent, reduce, insure and absorb risks of various natures are considered.

6) we are talking about the fact that each of the existing alternative possibilities for using some limited resources to prevent (eliminate) risk, limit it (control) or insure risks has its own “efficiency / costs” ratio. Therefore, it is important to determine which of the alternatives will give the greater effect in a particular situation, and use these most effective actions or a combination of them;

7) a number of interrelated elements are considered as a risk management system using: legislative measures; economic and financial impact; constructive and technological solutions; organizational measures (safety and labor protection), environmental measures. It is important for the state to ensure the balance and effectiveness of diverse actions to reduce operational risks. To achieve this, certain hazardous and harmful activities for society are legally prohibited (for example, the production and disposal of particularly dangerous substances), certain activities are licensed, etc.

8) simultaneously and in parallel with this, the state and local authorities establish special taxes (for example, a tax on the reproduction of the mineral resource base), create and manage the activities of various types of sanitary-epidemiological, technical and other inspections;

9) rationally ensure some balance in the consumption of resources, the intensity of risk management measures and other areas of production and economic activity. It is especially important to maintain such a balance in relation to risk management and target activities with restrictions on allocated resources;

10) in management it is advisable to study the risk of goals, determine the ways and means of achieving them (risk marketing), management;

11) management can consider the risks of studying and acting; risks of planning, organization, motivation and control; risks of secrecy and confidentiality; risks of conflict management.

12) there is always a reasonable balance between the desire for security and the resources necessary to ensure it. Risk management must have its own strategy, tactics and operational components (Blyakhman, 1999).

2.3 Classification of risk management solutions

The decision is the central link of any management. The classification of risk management decisions allows us to highlight their characteristic features and provide for the possibility of reducing risks when making decisions. According to the area of ​​adoption, geopolitical, foreign policy, domestic political, economic, financial, technological, design, and operational risk decisions can be distinguished. These types of decisions are systemically connected and can influence each other. Decisions can be distinguished according to their place in the risk management process:

1) risk-goal setting for choosing risk management goals. These are solutions that can be least explored and formalized. Formal methods for goal synthesis have not been developed;

2) risk marketing to select methods (prevent, reduce, insure, absorb) or tools (constructive, technological, financial, etc.) for risk management. These solutions allow formalization, in particular, the use of functional-logical methods;

3) risk management to maintain balance in the triangle “people - resources - goals” in the process of achieving the set risk goals with the risk management tools selected at the risk marketing stage.

Risk reduction is possible:

1) at the stage of planning an operation or designing samples - by introducing additional elements and measures;

2) at the decision-making stage - using appropriate criteria for assessing the effectiveness of a decision, for example, the Wald criteria (“count on the worst”) or Sedvidge (“count on the best”) or a criterion in which the risk indicator is limited in value (with alternatives not satisfying the risk constraint are not considered);

3) at the stage of performing the operation and operating technical systems - through strict adherence to and control of operating modes.

Within each area, the measures taken will have a different ratio of effectiveness (reducing the likelihood of unacceptable damage) to the costs of their implementation. These measures are associated with costs and require them to increase as the complexity of systems increases, so in certain conditions it may be more economically feasible to spend money not on preventing or reducing risk, but on compensating for possible damage. In the latter case, an insurance mechanism is used. Thus, if in the process of preparing a decision it turns out that risk reduction measures are ineffective and expensive at the same time, then it may be more economically feasible to insure your actions. In this case, the task is not to prevent, but to compensate for damage.

In accordance with approaches to management, risk solutions of traditional, systemic, situational, social and ethical management can be distinguished. Based on predictive efficiency in risk management, we can distinguish: ordinary, synergistic and asynergic options for solutions and systems. Ordinary variants of risk decisions are such variants of decisions in which the efficiency of spending resources per unit of effect obtained when managing risk corresponds to the norms and regulations adopted for the industry or type of activity under consideration.

Synergistic risk decision options are decision options in which the efficiency of resource expenditure in risk management increases sharply, that is, the effect is clearly disproportionately increasing. Synergistic solutions appear when developing new safe technologies (in agriculture, these are new types of fertilizers and food additives), searching and eliminating or protecting the most vulnerable areas, designing original devices, etc. Since the synergistic effect in risk management in any case is ultimately expressed in monetary form, then the synergistic effect of technology, labor organization, etc. found in the financial sector.

Asynergic solutions are those that do not allow obtaining a regulatory effect from the funds invested in risk management. Among the most common reasons for such decisions are: delay in the execution of the decision, lack of necessary resources, lack of organization, motivation, conflicts generated by resolutions, etc.

Based on the importance of taking into account time constraints on the development, adoption and execution of risk decisions, systems operating in real time are distinguished - systems in which decisions are made and implemented quickly enough to control and manage the object, including in the event of emergency situations management, crisis decision making. This situation is most typical for the crop growing industry Agriculture, in particular, when making decisions about the start of sowing and harvesting if appropriate natural conditions and resources. It seems possible to distinguish “crisis solutions” from real-time decisions. The translation of the word “crisis” is known as “moment of decision-making.” A crisis decision is a decision made at the moment corresponding to the moment of transition of the control object into the area of ​​uncontrollable or unacceptable states. Risk management has a special place in investment decisions.

The reasons behind the need for economic investment are updating the material and technical base, increasing the volume of production activities, and developing new types of activities (Egorov, 2002).

2.4 Typical risk decision algorithms

environmental risk management solution

If the problem is well structured based on substantive and statistical information, then programmed solutions can be used. Then the methodological features of various types of management are reflected in the development of algorithms for preparing and making risk decisions. The development of special algorithms for making risk decisions can ensure the necessary level of quality of organizational decisions and reduce the role of subjective factors. Crucially, this can speed up the risk management process. Generally speaking, for each of the risk problems typical for an organization, a specific decision-making algorithm can be developed. At the same time, it seems possible to develop an algorithm for making risk decisions for various types of management. The algorithm for making risk decisions in traditional management may include the following operations:

1) detection of risk problems;

2) collection of information about the sources, characteristics of harmful factors, vulnerability of the risk object, consequences and damages generated by exposure to harmful factors;

3) display of this information in a form convenient for analysis;

4) analysis of this information about the risks, vulnerability of the object, and the possible severity of damage;

5) determining management goals when solving a risk problem;

6) identification of a risk problem with one that previously occurred;

7) study of the risk management techniques used and their consequences;

8) choosing an option based on analogy and common sense;

The decision-making algorithm for systemic risk management may include the following operations:

1) control and detection of risk problems;

2) collection of information;

4) analysis of information about risks in the system;

5) study of the risk ratios of individual elements of the system;

6) study of risk ratios of various physical natures;

7) study of the relationship between the frequency and severity of risks of individual elements;

8) generating a list of possible control actions in relation to each of the risks of each element of the system and forecasting the effectiveness of these

9) impacts for a higher hierarchical level - the system level;

10) assessment and verification of solution options;

11) adoption, registration, communication to executors, execution, control of implementation of decisions.

The decision-making algorithm for situational risk management may include the following operations:

1) detection (control) of a risk problem;

2) collecting information about risks, harmful factors, vulnerabilities in a specific situation;

3) display of information in a form convenient for analysis;

4) analysis of information about the risks of the situation (sources, objects of risk; possible control actions; forecast of their effectiveness);

5) diagnosing the problem and ranking the risks of the situation;

6) determination of risk management goals in a specific situation, taking into account available resources;

7) development of a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of risk management in a specific situation;

8) verification and assessment of risk solution options;

9) adoption, registration, communication to executors, execution, control of implementation of decisions.

Decision-making algorithm for social and ethical management. The essence of this type of management is to prevent a catastrophic impact on the objects and subjects of management. One of the possible options for such a special risk decision-making algorithm includes:

1) collection of information regarding: sources of risk, their physical nature, frequency, state and vulnerability of the control object, available control actions, parameters of unacceptable states of the control object;

Similar documents

Modern approaches to identifying, analyzing and assessing environmental risk. General classification of risks, their sources and factors. Functional model of risk development. Total costs for reducing technogenic risk. Methods for assessing environmental risk.

presentation, added 04/28/2011


Structure of environmental risk. Federal and regional legislation in the field of industrial and environmental safety. Inventory and classification of objects of increased environmental risk. Accident databases.

course of lectures, added 05/24/2007


Approaches to environmental risk management. Parameters of the concept of acceptable risk. Information, administrative, legal and economic measures for risk management in the Russian Federation. Structure of the environmental management system of OAO Gazprom.

presentation, added 00.00.0000


Assessment of the level of environmental risk from heat supply to the village "Mirny" of a low-power boiler house operating on solid fuel. Calculation of emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere and the degree of their dispersion. Measures to reduce environmental risk.

course work, added 08/09/2012


Analysis of the degree and mechanisms of impact of rocket fuel on the environment. Justification of priority toxic compounds of rocket fuel. Conducting an assessment of the environmental risk associated with the use of the Soyuz-2 space rocket complex.

thesis, added 05/25/2014


Environmental audit as a tool for systematic verification of intra-company environmental potential and potential environmental risk, its functions and methods of implementation, goals and varieties. Environmental audit results and their application.

abstract, added 11/09/2010


Features of environmental risk management at an enterprise. Methodological approaches and principles for assessing environmental damage. Environmental risks and environmental damage from the activities of JSC ISKO-CH. Improving the environmental safety of the enterprise.

course work, added 04/11/2017


Assessment of the ecological state of the environment in the Tomsk region: atmospheric air, land, water, forest resources, radiation situation, wildlife. Mathematical models and methods for analyzing environmental risks of accidents on main pipelines.

course work, added 09/29/2013


Studying the concept of environmental risk - undesirable events that cause deviations in human health and the state of the environment from their average statistical value. Factors of human influence on the environment. Subject and tasks of the sociology of risk.

thesis, added 08/17/2011


Functions of environmental insurance. Insurance of life, health, property of citizens, as well as property interests of natural resource users from actions natural phenomena in accordance with civil law. The concept of insurance environmental risk.

Every year, environmental problems and risks become more and more relevant not only for society as a whole, but also for individual organizations that are objects of administrative management. Such organizations are divided into two main groups. The first group includes various state authorities, regional and local governments. The second group includes large enterprises of various forms of ownership.

Organizations forming the first and second groups are directly related to environmental risks. Moreover, the subjects of the first group act more as controlling and restraining bodies, and the enterprises of the second group act as potential sources of environmental hazards and threats. However, for both of them, the rational management of environmental risks that they face in their activities is of great importance.

We will try to highlight the main features and methods of managing environmental risks. To do this, it is necessary to first define the concept of “environmental risk”. Unfortunately, such a definition is missing in modern scientific literature. However, based on the main features and distinctive features of the category of environmental risk, this gap can be eliminated.

If we consider environmental risk as the mathematical expectation of the loss function when finding estimates of the parameters of a mathematical model or its structure, then its essence can be determined by at least six particularly important components:

1) the fact of the release of pollutants into the environment or unplanned depletion of natural resources;

2) the volume of the incoming harmful substance;

3) type of pollutant;

4) duration of polluting exposure;

5) time of year;

6) the degree of environmental hazard of this chemical or physical element.

Summarizing the above characteristics, we can formulate the concept of environmental risk. Under environmental risk the potential for environmental damage through accidental release of pollutants or unplanned pathological depletion of natural resources should be understood.

Both the emergency release of pollutants and the unplanned depletion of natural resources can be defined by the term “ecological disaster.”

The essence of environmental risk management is, on the one hand, to prevent the occurrence of environmental disasters, and on the other hand, to minimize their negative consequences.

Prevention of environmental disasters is carried out mainly through:

♦ clear forecasting of the environmental consequences of projects planned for implementation;

♦ development and implementation of environmentally friendly and resource-saving technologies;

♦ economic incentives for business entities that respect the environment;

♦ administrative and legal deterrence of unscrupulous entrepreneurs;

♦ Increasing use of environmental education and propaganda.

Minimizing the negative consequences of environmental disasters can be achieved through the use of environmental insurance. In foreign practice, this concept most often means insurance of civil liability of owners of potentially dangerous objects in connection with the need to compensate for damage to third parties caused by a technological accident or catastrophe. Its expanded interpretation includes comprehensive general liability, which provides protection for the insured in the event of any claim brought against him seeking compensation for losses resulting from property damage. Insured is the obligation (of a private law nature) of the insured provided for by the law on criminal liability to compensate for damage caused to society, as well as to legal entities and individuals as a result of the impact of harmful substances on land, air, water and other natural resources. Property losses arising from violation of property rights, rights to equipment and production activities and the right to use water space or a certificate of use are insured.

Property liability insurance related to pollution damage originated in the 1960s, when policies aimed to provide coverage for accidents and contingencies, defined as an event involving prolonged or repeated exposure to conditions that result in personal or property damage and are unexpected and unintentional on the part of the policyholder. These policies were essentially a license to pollute.

In the domestic literature, a slightly different idea of ​​environmental insurance has developed. Its definition should be given on the basis of characteristics of the features inherent both in the processes occurring in the natural environment under the influence of harmful substances entering it, and in property insurance and liability insurance operations.

Emergency environmental pollution insurance focuses on risks, the origin of which often cannot be identified, and therefore cannot be assessed and adequately reflected in quantitative indicators. It will probably never be possible to construct an integral indicator of the consequences of emergency pollution that reliably reflects the level of economic losses, and there is no such need. It is necessary to create a methodology acceptable for users (in our case, for insurers and policyholders) for assessing the losses caused to them.

The specificity of emergency pollution or depletion lies in the fact that the consequences of it and the so-called constant anthropogenic pressure on nature are incomparable. At the same time, the continuous flow of harmful substances into the environment in volumes significantly exceeding those temporarily permissible can be classified, based on its negative results, as emergency pollution. This gives grounds to talk about methods for determining the qualitative and numerical characteristics of emergency environmental pollution. However, the probability of a situation in which the impact on natural components fits within the outlined framework cannot be calculated using the information base available today.

There are no statistics on accidents with recorded environmental effects, or perhaps not yet available (which is unlikely). This is primarily due to the lack of a clear concept of an environmental accident. One can give enough examples of accidents and man-made disasters, even the frequency of their occurrence, but there is no methodology for assessing the environmental hazard of a particular production that meets the requirements of environmental insurance.

The main thing in the methodology for assessing the environmental hazard of enterprises and industries should be environmental insurance auditing. It is intended to answer only two, but very important questions:

1) what is the probability of an environmental accident at a specific facility included in the environmental insurance system;

2) what is the magnitude of losses that may be caused by an environmental accident.

There are several methodological approaches to the problem of insurance environmental auditing in its current form.

The danger of industrial production, firstly, is identified by the list of harmful chemicals used in this production in critical quantities, secondly, it is determined by the multiple excess of maximum environmental impact standards, thirdly, it is identified based on the calculated values ​​of the risk of pollution and hypothetical damage caused by it.

The methodology of environmental insurance is characterized by the dissimilarity of views of foreign and domestic researchers on its role in the economic life of society. For the former, it is associated and carried out (rarely) within the framework of property insurance. If it is carried out in the process of liability insurance, then the damage caused to the owner of the property or his health as a result of pollution, and not necessarily an accident, is compensated by the insurance organization. She does this either on the basis of a previously concluded insurance contract, which provides for regular insurance premiums, or at the expense of the culprit identified in court. In both cases, the amount of loss is determined by traditional methods of assessing property losses and lost profits.

In environmental insurance, losses are considered losses caused by the release of a certain amount (in emergency volume) of a harmful substance into the environment from one source and the formation of negative effects in specific recipients. In liability insurance for accidental pollution, the person who causes the harm and the recipient are personified. In property insurance against environmental pollution, the contribution of an individual pollutant is not allocated. It follows that financial coverage of insurance amounts is provided not only from various sources, but also the received insurance premium is used by the insurer for various purposes.

So, environmental insurance, carried out as liability insurance for accidental environmental pollution, is aimed at ensuring environmental safety and compensation for losses of third parties (of course, subject to the commercial interests of the insured), and property insurance is aimed only at compensating for the losses of the insured.

This differs from other types of insurance, such as medical insurance, although it would seem to cover the same circle of persons, called “third parties” in insurance, as the latter. Losses expressed, say, in the loss of public health, are determined in environmental insurance on completely different principles than in medical insurance. In environmental science, it is necessary to identify sources of harm and recipients with maximum reliability and, depending on this, determine tariff and compensation policies. Health insurance is based on different premises: every enterprise that pays wages to its employees bears the financial burden of eliminating losses associated with the disease of the population, regardless of whether this enterprise causes harm. The definition of environmental insurance as insurance of the liability of enterprises - sources of increased environmental danger and property interests of policyholders arising as a result of emergency environmental pollution, providing the possibility of compensating for part of the losses caused by pollution and creating additional sources of financing for environmental protection measures, is guided precisely by the methodological basis that is discussed here there was a speech. Its main task is additional financial support for environmental safety while respecting the interests of all parties: insurers, policyholders and third parties.

While there is a fairly rich range of regulatory and methodological documentation for property insurance operations, it has yet to be developed for insurance of liability for accidental environmental pollution.

The fact that the need to find new sources of financing for environmental activities today is more acute than ever is clear, as is the fact that so far only private capital has real additional financial reserves. Finding attractive investment areas for him is another function of environmental insurance in the sense in which we understand it.

There is a point of view that the adoption of the Federal Law “On Environmental Insurance” will oblige polluting enterprises to participate in environmental insurance. An obligation not supported by economic feasibility will remain an empty phrase. The law must fit into economic relations and take into account the realities of the insurance business and environmental activities of policyholders.

There are currently several pieces of legislation outlining the limits of polluter liability and the role of insurance in this area.

In Art. 23 of the Law “On Environmental Protection” states that “the Russian Federation carries out... environmental insurance of enterprises, institutions, organizations, as well as citizens, their property and income in the event of environmental and natural disasters, accidents and catastrophes.” Insurance serves not only to make a profit, but also to prevent, eliminate and compensate for harm (in environmental economics the term “damage” is used, in legal practice - “loss”) caused to victims. Here, economic damage is understood as the sum of the costs of preventing the impact of the contaminated environment on recipients (in cases where such prevention, partial or complete, is technically possible) and the costs caused by the impact of the contaminated environment on them. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation legislates: “Losses are understood as expenses that a person whose right has been violated has made or will have to make to restore the violated right, loss or damage to his property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions of civil circulation, if his right had not been violated (lost profits), if the person who violated the right received income as a result, the person whose right was violated may demand compensation, along with other damages, for lost profits in an amount not less than such income."

Thus, theoretically, the amount of the insurance amount consists of the costs of preventing accidental pollution and assessing the impact of the polluted environment on the recipient. For the policyholder, the first represents additional expenses that are unjustified in the absence of environmental insurance during the validity period of the contract. For society and third parties in whose favor an insurance contract for liability for accidental environmental pollution is concluded, such costs are part of the potential losses. Realizing this and assessing the possible insurance compensation, the insurer either allocates funds to prevent accidents or forces (economically stimulates) the policyholder to take environmental protection measures. They can either be carried out or taken into account in calculating the sum insured.

The second component of the insured amount is losses resulting from the impact of harmful substances released into the environment on recipients. Unlike the first type of losses, they also occur to third parties. In both cases, environmental insurance acts as insurance of liability for emergency pollution of the environment by sources of increased environmental hazard.

Losses from accidental pollution are suffered not only by recipients - third parties in whose interests liability insurance is carried out, but also by the policyholders themselves - sources of pollution, who are also recipients. Insurers can be both.

In this regard, the differentiation of the compensation policies of insurers was discussed above. Thus, by compensating for losses of a source of accidental pollution within the framework of property insurance, the insurer does not create an interest for the policyholder in preventing pollution. By indemnifying the losses of recipients - third parties, it frees the insurer - the emitter of pollution - from the need to eliminate the consequences and prevent a future accident.

A special role in monitoring the behavior of the policyholder is assigned to tariff rates for environmental insurance. They cannot be established uniformly not only, for example, for the sectors of production of the insured, but even for individual enterprises. The same applies to liability limits for environmental pollution risks accepted by the insurer.

Theoretical aspects of the relationship between insurers and policyholders in such situations require modeling possible situational solutions and developing an appropriate methodological framework.

The insurance process itself rewards those who minimize future risks and costs to society. As a result, the private market mechanism becomes a regulatory and risk management tool with the potential to significantly reduce environmental damage. The use of such a direct economic incentive can be an effective addition to traditional methods of economic and legal regulation of the relationship between society and nature. So, let us highlight four blocks of fundamental problems in the development of environmental insurance. The first, which determines the essence, place and role of environmental insurance in the economy, gives it, as an element of ensuring the environmental safety of the country, national significance. This factor is the basis of the concept of introducing compulsory environmental insurance.

The second block represents the fundamental provisions of insurance environmental auditing, which allows solving the problems of attributing objects of the insurance field (assessing the degree of environmental hazard of enterprises and industries, the amount of possible losses, etc.).

The third forms the legal space of environmental insurance. In Russia, unlike a number of Western countries, there is a real opportunity to create a comprehensive legal framework for the development of environmental insurance. The basis will be the Federal Law “On Environmental Insurance” and the corresponding methodological and instructional documents, which make up the fourth block.

Environmental risk management is a logical continuation of environmental risk assessment and analysis. It is based on a set of political, social and economic assessments of the obtained risk values, a comparative description of possible damage to the health of both an individual and society as a whole, the possible costs of implementing various options for management decisions to reduce risk and the benefits that will be obtained as a result implementation of events.

Environmental risk management has four elements.

1. Comparative assessment and ranking of risks according to their nature
rank, as well as the social and medical significance of possible
consequences for human health.

2. Determination of risk acceptability levels.

3. Selecting a risk reduction and control strategy.

4. Making management decisions.

If at the final stage of environmental risk assessment the degree of danger of a particular substance under certain conditions is established, then at the initial stage of environmental risk management a comparative risk profile is carried out in order to establish priorities - identifying a range of issues requiring priority attention, determining the likelihood and establishing the consequences. This stage of risk management includes determining the probability levels of developing health disorders and analyzing their causality.

Risk management can be carried out in several ways:

1. Absolute control - reducing risk to zero. This approach is used when there is a real possibility of completely preventing exposure to a particularly hazardous chemical, for example, by banning its production and use.

2. Reducing risk to a reasonable maximum technically and economically achievable level. This approach is quite subjective, as it requires argumentation of the concepts of “reasonableness” and “maximality”. The application of this approach must necessarily be accompanied by an assessment of possible damage to health, since otherwise it is impossible to assess the cost-benefit ratio.

3. Application of the concept of minimum, i.e. reducing the risk to a level that is perceived by absolutely everyone as practically zero.

4. Establishment of risk at a level acceptable for each individual and society as a whole (“adequate margin of safety”).

When analyzing risk acceptability, the following are taken into account:

Benefits from the use of a particular substance (for example, increased crop yields due to the use of pesticides);

Costs associated with regulating the use of this substance (complete or partial ban, replacing it with another drug, etc.);

Possibility of implementing measures to reduce potential negative impact substances on the environment and human health.

The cost-benefit method of economic analysis is widely used to establish risk acceptability. However, the concept of acceptability is determined not only by the results of economic analysis, but also by a large number of political and social factors, including the perception of environmental risk by various population groups.

The strategy for controlling environmental risk levels involves a selection of measures, in to the greatest extent helping to minimize or eliminate risk. Such typical measures may include:

Use of warning markings (inscriptions, stickers, labels);

Limiting the number of persons in the risk source area;

Limiting the scope of use of a risk source or areas with such sources (for example, prohibiting the use of contaminated areas of the territory for recreational purposes);

A complete ban on the production, use and import of certain
chemical substance or the use of this technology
logical process or equipment.

The tasks of environmental risk management, along with the development of priority measures to eliminate and reduce risk, include the choice of a strategy for periodic or continuous monitoring of exposures and risks. These types of monitoring perform the following functions:

Control (comparison with maximum permissible or acceptable levels);

Alarm (quick response to a dangerous situation);

Prognostic (the ability to predict risks);

Instrumental (as a means for recognizing and classifying observed phenomena).

The development of an environmental risk management system in technogenic systems requires the identification of characteristic components of production and significant environmental aspects of the activities of a particular enterprise that have a negative impact on the environment and public health, the presence of an information system in order to disseminate the results of determining the levels of risks to human health among the interested part of the population (e.g. among physicians, management decision makers, researchers, the public and society at large).

Communication and dissemination of risk information is a natural extension of the risk assessment process. A risk assessment would be meaningless if the results obtained were not communicated in some way to those involved in risk reduction decisions.

The results obtained from the risk assessment process should be presented in such a way that they are accessible to non-specialists, members of the press and the public, and allow identification of public opinion about the impact of current or planned economic activities.

When disseminating risk information, it is necessary to take into account the specific risk perception different groups of the population. If risk assessment specialists are guided by

quantitative characteristics and professional information, then the population in its perception of risk is guided not only by its quantitative characteristics and possible health consequences, but also by the already formed opinion of the public.

An important factor, influencing the perception of information about risk is the clarification of the voluntary nature of the risk. The population is always more concerned about forced rather than voluntary risks. Therefore, factors that increase the sense of danger and, as a result, cause greater “outrage” include such as inhalation of air contaminated with industrial chemicals (artificial risk), catastrophic leaks of gaseous toxic substances (catastrophic risk), microorganisms created by genetic engineering methods (exotic risk), a risk associated with the lack of visible advantages (construction of any enterprises near residential buildings).

The reaction of a person or group of people to risk is determined both by individual factors and by factors characterizing the risk itself or information about it.

Individual factors factors influencing risk perception are divided into the following groups:

Personal characteristics;

Emotional condition.

Factors associated with the risk itself are characterized by:

The origin of the danger and the consequences that the risk may lead to;

The severity of the risk for an individual or group of persons;

The severity of the consequences of the risk;

Variability of risk information obtained from different sources.

Informing the population about environmental risk is an integral part of the risk management system. Communication is a process of interaction in the exchange of data and opinions regarding risk between individuals, groups of people and institutions.

The basic rules for disseminating information about environmental risk are based on the maximum involvement of the public in a qualified and friendly discussion of problems related to the assessment of this risk. These rules are formulated as follows.

Treat the public as a legitimate partner and ensure their participation in decisions that affect their lives and value systems. This rule is based on the belief that the population has the right to participate in decisions that directly affect their lives. Public information must be organized so that its participation is productive.

Take into account interests various groups population, carefully plan the transfer of information. When communicating with a population, careful planning should be done to convey information about risk, as many groups of people have their own special interests and concerns. For example, residents living near a chemical plant will be of little interest in the number of deaths per 1 ton of plant output. They will be interested in what the risk of disease is for them and their children.

Listen to the concerns of the population. People will begin to listen to specialists only when specialists begin to listen to the voice of citizens. People, as a rule, are more concerned about issues such as social justice, availability of work, and the responsibility of officials than statistics on mortality and morbidity. You should delve into what is bothering them and make it clear that you know about it.

Gain the trust of the population. When disseminating information, it is necessary to be honest and not to minimize or exaggerate the degree of risk, trying, for example, to solve the problem of funding scientific research. Do not attempt to answer questions that have not been sufficiently studied or are controversial. Be prepared to answer, “I don’t know.” Do not express unscientific views on issues related to environmental quality and health impacts.

Coordinate your work and collaborate with other reliable partners. In cases of disagreement regarding factors

risk, scientists should strive to develop a consensus view before information is made available to the public.

Consider media requests. Risk assessors and regulators must be available to reporters, as the press is the main source of information.

Express your thoughts clearly and understandably. You should try to use it less often special terms and professional jargon, do not overload information with statistics.

When communicating and disseminating information about environmental risk, misconceptions may arise about the role of the information itself in highlighting the risk. For example, the idea that the dissemination of information about risk does not always contribute to resolving a conflict situation and simplifies the adoption of management decisions to control risk is erroneous. This is due to the fact that not all people share common interests and general systems values. Management decisions to control risk may suit some people and not at all suit others.

Environmental management provides great opportunities for risk management. During the 90s, the vast majority of leading foreign industrial companies demonstrated significant results in reducing the negative impact on the environment while simultaneously increasing production volumes, reducing specific costs of raw materials and materials, saving energy resources, and improving product quality. Environmental activities as one of the components of balanced development are becoming more and more economically justified, allowing enterprises to use the various direct and indirect advantages and benefits associated with it.

The development of environmental management is becoming generally accepted as a way to practically solve environmental problems and reduce environmental risk in technogenic systems. Environmental management can be defined as the process and result of the proactive activities of economic entities aimed at consistent improvement in achieving their own environmental goals and objectives, developed on the basis of independently adopted environmental policies. The characteristic features of this process are:

Increasing environmental responsibility of enterprises due to the global trend towards reducing government intervention in the economy, stimulating private initiative and creating global markets;

The transition of enterprises from a passive position in solving environmental problems, determined by the requirements of state environmental control, to an active position, largely determined by their own goals and objectives;

Expanding the boundaries of proactive environmental activities of enterprises;

Shifting priorities in actions from the “end of the pipe” (cleaning Wastewater, waste gases, disposal and disposal of waste) directly on the sources of negative impact on the environment (use of resources, technological processes, organization of production);

Establishing a direct relationship between environmental activities and opportunities to attract investment, production development, saving and saving resources, reducing losses, improving product quality and its competitiveness;

Maximum use of cost-free and low-cost methods and means to solve environmental problems; activation of internal unused reserves and capabilities;

Open demonstration by the enterprise of environmental goals, objectives and results achieved in accordance with them, including negative results;

Active cooperation with all persons and parties interested in the environmental aspects of the enterprise (from investors, shareholders and business partners to consumers, the public and competitors).

The practical basis for the activities of enterprises in the field of environmental management is the prevention of negative impacts on the environment. Its characteristic areas include:

Saving raw materials, materials, energy resources;

Reduction of technological losses, losses during storage and transportation, unaccounted losses, etc.;

Reducing the consumption of extremely hazardous and highly hazardous substances and materials;

Use of secondary resources;

Improvement of main and auxiliary technological processes in order to reduce sources of formation of pollutants, waste and other harmful factors affecting the environment;

Organization of flows of pollutants and waste;

Recycling (processing and use of production and consumption waste, production of by-products);

Reducing situations with increased environmental risk (accidental impact on the environment);

Preparation for activities and activities in conditions of emergency impact on the environment; elimination of environmental consequences of accidents;

Environmental education of enterprise personnel in order to improve environmental culture and reduce environmental risks for personnel;

Increasing the efficiency of industrial environmental monitoring.

Effective activity of an enterprise in the field of environmental management is considered as the main guarantee of environmental safety and the ability to manage environmental risks in the process of design, construction and operation of industrial facilities. The development of activities in the field of environmental management will make it possible not only to solve specific economic and environmental problems facing individual enterprises and the country as a whole, but also to involve the untapped potential of Russia (including cultural, intellectual, entrepreneurial) in solving national and global environmental problems.

Practical lessons:

Module 2. Basic principles for ensuring human and environmental safety

No. 1. Global environmental problems: climate change, destruction of the ozone layer, pollution of natural waters with organic substances, etc.

Protective mechanisms of the natural environment and factors ensuring its sustainability. Dynamic balance in the natural environment. Hydrological cycle, cycle of energy and matter, photosynthesis.

No. 2. Diagnostics and chemical-analytical control of environmental objects. Maximum permissible concentrations. Sanitary and hygienic standardization. Environmental quality indicators. Environmental impact assessment. Pathways of transformation of pollutants in the environment

No. 3. Individual and collective risk. Risk level. Distribution of risk among the population. Perception of risks and society's reaction to them.

Comparison and analysis of risks on a single scale. Uncertainties in risk assessments. Risks from exposure to multiple hazards. Total risk.

No. 4. Application of logical analysis methods - fault tree, event tree.

No. 5. Nature and scale of stationary and emergency chemical releases. Dynamics and forecasts. Analysis of the causes of accidents at chemical and chemical facilities. Impact assessment.

Module 3. Main directions and methods of combating environmental pollution.

No. 6. Methods of wastewater treatment. Atmospheric purification methods.

No. 7. Disposal of industrial solid waste.

No. 8. Methods of localization, conservation, disposal of radioactive waste.