风险动物园(Ⅰ):基于隐喻理论的风险图谱构成与表征

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.06.0530

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为加强对风险事件的理解与管控,利用隐喻理论深入探索风险图谱的构成要素与表征方式。通过分析不同风险事件隐喻的特点,基于风险矩阵的方法原理,把风险图谱划分为黑天鹅事件、灰犀牛事件、金丝猴事件以及大白兔事件4个象限。在考虑风险事件产生的特殊机制和管理者的态度与行为时,补充“龙王”事件和“大白鲨”事件,以及“纸老虎”“大白象”“恐龙”“鸵鸟”等系列隐喻,共同构成风险动物园图谱,并从风险管理和风险本体2个视角,讨论风险动物园的图谱解析和应用。结果表明:在风险管理工作中,除考虑风险事件发生的可能性和后果外,风险评估者的知识维度也至关重要;同时,风险事件在发展过程中,事件属性也会随着时间发生变化;最后,基于流程管理理论提供一个风险动物园图谱的应用普适性流程框架。

关键词: 风险动物园, 隐喻理论, 风险图谱, 风险管理

Abstract:

The metaphor theory was used to thoroughly examine the elements and representations of risk mapping in order to improve the understanding and management of risk events. Based on the methodological concept of risk matrix, by examining the metaphorical features of various risk events, the risk mapping was divided into four quadrants: the black swan event, the gray rhino event, the golden monkey event and the white rabbit event. Taking into account the unique mechanisms of risk events and the attitudes and behaviors of managers, the events of "dragon king" and "great white shark" were added, which together with the events of "paper tiger", "white elephant", "dinosaur" and "ostrich" constituted a risk zoo map. Risk management and risk ontology were two viewpoints from which the study and implementation of risk zoo mapping were examined. The findings demonstrate that, in risk management, knowledge of risk assessors is also important besides considering the possibility and consequences of risk events. At the same time, the types of events will change as risk events develop. Finally, a process management theory-based applied universal process framework for risk zoo mapping is presented.

Key words: risk zoo, metaphor theory, risk mapping, risk management

佟瑞鹏, 胡向阳, 和杰花, 孙宁昊. 风险动物园(Ⅰ):基于隐喻理论的风险图谱构成与表征[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(6): 27-34.

TONG Ruipeng, HU Xiangyang, HE Jiehua, SUN Ninghao. Risk zoo(Ⅰ): composition and characterization of risk mapping based on metaphor theory[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(6): 27-34.

图/表 7

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 24

[1]	刘岩. 风险的社会建构:过程机制与放大效应[J]. 天津社会科学, 2010(5):74-76.
[2]	徐盛桓. 隐喻本体和喻体的相似:分形论视域下隐喻研究之二[J]. 当代修辞学, 2020(2):11-23.
	XU Shenghuan. The similarity between the target domain and the source domain: a tentative study of “Fractal-theoretical approach to metaphor”[J]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 2020(2):11-23.
[3]	杨诚. 汉英媒体中的“黑天鹅”与“灰犀牛”:概念整合—语料库视阈下的风险隐喻研究[J]. 成都理工大学学报:社会科学版, 2019, 27(5):78-85.
	YANG Cheng. "Black Swan" and "Gray Rhino" in Chinese and English media: study of risk metaphors from the perspective of conceptual integration and corpora[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology:Social Sciences, 2019, 27(5):78-85.
[4]	AVEN T. On the meaning of the black swan concept in a risk context[J]. Safety Science, 2013, 57: 44-51. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.01.016
[5]	AVEN T. Implications of black swans to the foundations and practice of risk assessment and management[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2015, 134(4):83-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2014.10.004
[6]	黄杰, 吴佳. 中国大都市的“灰犀牛式危机”与政府风险治理模式的重塑:基于两个典型案例的分析[J]. 公共管理与政策评论, 2021, 10(5):79-94.
	HUANG Jie, WU Jia. "The gray rhino crisis" in Chinese metropolis and the remodeling of the government's risk governance model: based on the analysis of two typical cases[J]. Public Administration and Policy Review, 2021, 10(5):79-94.
[7]	TALEB N. The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable[M]. New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2007:25-45.
[8]	HOLE K, NETLAND L-H. Toward risk assessment of large-impact and rare events[J]. IEEE Security Privacy, 2010, 8(3):21-27.
[9]	SORNETTE D. Dragon-kings, black swans and the prediction of crises[J]. International Journal of Terraspace Science and Engineering, 2009, 2(1):1-18.
[10]	佟瑞鹏, 孙大力, 郭子萌. 基于“隐喻”的风险事件分类模型及其转化关系[J]. 安全, 2020, 41(7):8-15.
	TONG Ruipeng, SUN Dali, GUO Zimeng. Risk event classification model and its transformation relationship based on "Metaphor"[J]. Safety & Security, 2020, 41(7):8-15.
[11]	MURPHY J F, CONNER J. Black swans, white swans, and 50 shades of grey: remembering the lessons learned from catastrophic process safety incidents[J]. Process Safety Progress, 2014, 33(2): 110-114. doi: 10.1002/prs.v33.2
[12]	STEIN J L, STEIN S. Gray swans: comparison of natural and financial hazard assessment and mitigation[J]. Natural Hazards, 2014, 72(3):1279-1297. doi: 10.1007/s11069-012-0388-x
[13]	LIN Ning, EMANUEL K. Grey swan tropical cyclones[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2016, 6(1):106-111. doi: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2777
[14]	佟瑞鹏, 谢贝贝, 安宇. 黑天鹅事件定义及分类的探讨[J]. 中国公共安全:学术版, 2017(2):44-48.
	TONG Ruipeng, XIE Beibei, AN Yu. Discussion on the definition and classification of the black swan event[J]. China Public Security: Academy Edition, 2017(2):44-48.
[15]	WUCKER M. The gray rhino: how to recognize and act on the obvious dangers we ignore[M]. London: Macmillan, 2016:1-28.
[16]	彭宗超. 风险社会来临:警惕无察觉危机蔓延[J]. 人民论坛, 2012(16):48-49.
[17]	周利敏, 胡项连. 无察觉危机、社会情绪共振及风险管理策略的选择[J]. 中国地质大学学报:社会科学版, 2014, 14(4):108-115.
[18]	中共中央宣传部理论局. 千秋伟业百年华章[N]. 人民日报, 2022-05-23(8).
[19]	DEKKER S W. The bureaucratization of safety[J]. Safety Science, 2014, 70:348-357. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.07.015
[20]	孙建平. 除了“黑天鹅”“灰犀牛”别忽视了“大白象”[J]. 水上消防, 2020(2):16-20.
[21]	KAPLAN S, GAR RICK B J. On the quantitative definition of risk[J]. Risk Analysis, 1981, 1(1):11-27. doi: 10.1111/risk.1981.1.issue-1
[22]	AVEN T. The cautionary principle in risk management: foundation and practical use[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2019, 191:DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2019.106585. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.106585
[23]	中华人民共和国应急管理部. 河南郑州“7·20”特大暴雨灾害调查报告[EB/OL]. [2022-01-21]. https://www.mem.gov.cn/gk/sgcc/tbzdsgdcbg/202201/P020220121639049697767.pdf
[24]	严佳, 张海波. 公共安全及其治理:理论内涵与制度实践[J]. 南京社会科学, 2022(12):75-85.
	YAN Jia, ZHANG Haibo. Public security &safety (PSS) and its governance: theoretical connotation and institutional practice[J]. Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences, 2022, (12):75-85.