Risk Management

  • 1.  New Policy Statement on Risk Management - No Comment

    Posted 10-07-2025 08:09 PM

    I just learned about this. It is interesting.

    Policy statement 437 - Risk management

    Asce remove preview
    Policy statement 437 - Risk management
    Engineered systems must be planned and designed to be robust, resilient, and provided with appropriate redundancy to adequately address inherent risks.
    View this on Asce >

    From ASCE's guidance on policy statements:

    Goal is to provide ASCE's position on an issue that affects the profession either in a direct or a broad way. Ideally, ASCE has a unique take on the issue, and that should be clearly stated in the policy (first section labeled "Policy"). All policy statement must be approved by the Public Policy Committee and adopted by the ASCE Board of Direction.  

    Audience can vary, but primarily consists of:
    •    Lawmakers, elected and appointed officials at the federal, state and local levels
    •    Boards, Commissions and other advisory or statutory authorities
    •    Media who cover the issue discussed
    •    Allies and opponents of ASCE's position on the issue
    •    ASCE members



    ------------------------------
    Mitch Winkler P.E.(inactive), M.ASCE
    Houston, TX
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: New Policy Statement on Risk Management - No Comment

    Posted 10-12-2025 05:23 PM

    Interesting, yes. Is it useful? 

    As with several other ASCE policy statements on risk, it does not define risk, nor does it define risk management except by inference.

    I find the second bullet confusing. Is machine learning labeled as a hazard or a tool? Both? 

    Bill Mc



    ------------------------------
    William McAnally Ph.D., P.E., BC.CE, BC.NE, F.ASCE
    ENGINEER
    Columbus MS
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: New Policy Statement on Risk Management - No Comment

    Posted 10-12-2025 06:07 PM

    The stated goal of policy statements such as this is to provide ASCE's position on an issue that affects the profession to a non-technical audience, including politicians, government officials, media, etc.  Like you, I found the document poorly written, which is sad given the plethora of tools available to create a more polished document. I also found the document to be pandering in its choice of risk definition and what was omitted. As practitioners of risk management, I think it's good to know this is out there, but not to get hung up on it. 



    ------------------------------
    Mitch Winkler P.E.(inactive), M.ASCE
    Houston, TX
    ------------------------------