Voting Summary

Confirm your interest in further development of new standards for Emerging Risk & Resilience Management!

If the image not displayed, please refresh. If you receive an error, please retry.
Total count: 19
By Country
If the image not displayed, please refresh. If you receive an error, please retry.
Total count: 19, Country count: 11
Yes by Country
If the image not displayed, please refresh. If you receive an error, please retry.
Total count: 19, Country count: 11
By Company Activity Type
If the image not displayed, please refresh. If you receive an error, please retry.
Total count: 19
Records found: 19
Nr.CountryVoteComment 1
1ChinaYesAs part of the european ResiStand project we're very interested in any developments in the area of standardization, in particular connected to risk and resilience. The confirmation for another three years is definitely good and the revision of the current standard will add high value by including the additional informative annexes, especially for the end-users of the document, as international and national standards don't give "real guidance", cases/examples and procedures for practical use. Within our project our intension is to test our ResiStand procedure by applying it to a "new work item" within one of the TCs. We are very interested in the development as it would be a great possibility to use this document as an example.
2GermanyYesAs the convener of the initial standard, I can confirm that the issue treated in this standard has enormously gained on its importance, both on the national and international levels. Apart from that, it has become a multisectoral issue appearing transversally across the areas previously hardly interconnected.
9SwitzerlandYesI think that this is a very valuable and useful effort and the first version has been a great step towards improving certain aspects of risk assessment and management, which standard methods for "routine" risks do not capture well. The field of emerging risk assessment and management is of growing importance, given the systemic nature of some of them, which develop in complex adaptive systems (risks emerge often as a result of the complexity of interconnected systems). So organisations need guidance. At the same time, the field is not mature yet, so further work is needed and guidance can improve. Further it would be useful to be more explicit about two different characteristics: systemic and emerging. The next version of the standards might benefit from addressing separetely systemic risks and emerging risks. This would mean that section 5.2, top of page 23 would be refined as follows: - modify: the systemic nature of emerging risks - to: the systemic nature of some emerging risks - modify: link of emerging risks to HILPs - to: link of emerging risks to HILPs, resulting from shocks or stresses - modify: multidisciplinary character - to: need to address emerging risks with an interdisciplinary and multistakeholder approach With regards to input from IRGC: 1) IRGC has published in 2015 its "Guidelines for the Governance of EMERGING Risks" (GGER), which precisely refine those aspects of the IRGC "Risk Governance Framework" that needed to be refined for the purpose of addressing emerging risks. The next version of the standards for emerging Risks adn Resilience Management would benefit from making a link to the GGER, which are available from: This would involve changes in section 7.3 2) IRGC is working to produce new "Guidelines for the Governance of SYSTEMIC Risks" (GGSR). IRGC will provide guidelines for risks that develop in complex adaptive systems, considering external shocks as well as internal stresses, and resilience and other strategies for adaptation and/or transformation of the system. It will be fully compatible with IRGC’s previous concepts and tools. We propose to prepare a short note for use and reference in the revised standards.
10ChinaYesI support the further development of new standards for emerging risk and resilience management. Especially with accordance with the newlly revised ISO 31000.
11DenmarkYesAs coordinator of the caLIBRAte project, I agree to support the further development of the DIN CW 16649, with particular emphasis on nanomaterials and nanoproducts.
12ChinaYesYes, we support the further development and would suggest to focus in particular to the issues related to Industry 4.0. We can support the activity together with the Chinese Standardization organization (CNIS). Dr. Liu Yan, Beijing Municipal Institute for Labour Protection, Beijing Academy of Science and Technology, China
17GermanyYesWe have to add Elemts to identify and assess systemic risks and to integrate the resilience-Assessment of various Systems/infrastructures against new threats. This of course involves KPI's to measure preparedness
18United StatesYes 
19FranceYesThe topic of this document is to deal with new emerging risks, so it is natural that the document's validity is extended and at the same time it evolves and incorporates new knowledge acquired since the last edition.