Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 273, 2019
International Cross-industry Safety Conference (ICSC) - European STAMP Workshop & Conference (ESWC) (ICSC-ESWC 2018)
Article Number 02008
Number of page(s) 18
Section European STAMP Workshop & Conference
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201927302008
Published online 22 February 2019
  1. Cameron, I., Mannan, S., Neémeth, E., Park, S., Pasman, H., Rogers, W., & Seligmann, B. (2017). Process Hazard Analysis, Hazard Identification and Scenario Definition: Are the conventional tools sufficient, or should and can we do much better? Process Safety and Environment Protection, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.01.025. [Google Scholar]
  2. CGE Risk. (2017). Bowtie Methodology Manual, Rev 17. CGE Risk Management Solutions. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chatzimichailidou, M. M., Ward, J., Horberry, T., & Clarkson, J. P. (2018). A Comparison of the Bow-Tie and STAMP Approaches to Reduce the Risk of Surgical Instrument Retention. Safety Analysis, 38, pp. 978-990. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12897 [Google Scholar]
  4. Dokas, I. M., Feehan, J., & Imran, S. (2013). EWaSAP: An early warning sign identification approach based on a systemic hazard analysis. Safety Science, 58, 11-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.03.013 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fleming, C. H., Spencer, M., Thomas, J., Leveson, N., & Wilkinson, C. (2018). Safety assurance in NextGen and complex transportation systems. Safety Science, 55, 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.12.005 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hokstad, P., Røstum, J., Sklet, S., Roseén, L., Pettersson, T. J., Linde, A., . . . Niewersch, C. (2009). Methods for risk analysis of drinking water systems from source to tap - guidance report on Risk Analysis. TECHNEAU report. [Google Scholar]
  7. Lee, P.G. (1995) A review of automated control systems for aquaculture and design criteria for their implementation. Aquacultural Engineering pp205-227, https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8609(94)00002-I [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Leveson, N. (2013). Engineering a Safer World: Systems Thinking Applied to Safety. Boston, Massachusetts: MIT Press. ISBN978-0-262-01662-9 [Google Scholar]
  9. Leveson, N. (2015). A systems approach to risk management through leading safety indicators. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 136, 7-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2014.10.008 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Leveson, N., & Thomas, J. (2018). STPA Handbook. Accessed: Apr., 2018. [Online]. Available: http://psas.scripts.mit.edu/ home/get_file.php?name=STPA_handbook.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  11. Leveson, N., Daouk, M., Dulac, N., & Marais, K. (2003). Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis. Workshop on the Investigation and Reporting of Inicdents Accidents. [Google Scholar]
  12. McLoed, R. W., & Bowie, P. (2018). Bowtie Analysis as a prospective risk assessment technique in primary healthcare. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, 16, 177-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2018.1466460. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Merrett, H. C., Horng, J. J., & Chen, W. T. (2018). Systems Analysis of the 1998 Sydney Water Crisis. Presentation at 2018 MIT STAMP Workshop. [Google Scholar]
  14. Olsson, G., (2007) Automation Development in Water and Wastewater Systems. Environmental Engineering Research, 12, 197-200, https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2007.12.5.197 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Reason, J. (2000). Human error: models and management. British Medical Journal, 320, 768-770. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7237.768 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Saud, Y. E., Israni, K., & Goddard, J. (2014). Bow-Tie diagrams in downstream hazard identification and Risk Assessment Process. Safety Progress, 33, 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.11576 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Savvas, D. (2003). Hydroponics: A modern technology supporting the application of integrated crop management in greenhouse. Food, Agriculture & Environment, 1, 80-86. [Google Scholar]
  18. Sulaman, S. M., Beer, A., Felder, M., & Host, M. (2017). Comparison of FMEA and STPA safety analysis methods: a case study. Software Quality Journal, 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9396-0 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.