A Risk Assessment of Piql Services by FFI

problem in turn needed to be so large, the parameters that were defined would have very different relevance for different parts of the spectrum of events which could somehow affect the object of study. While attempting to apply the method to the entire spectrum it was also revealed that it would either become too specific in places or too ambiguous and crude in others [43 p.12]. The same reflections are relevant to the problem in our risk assessment. That is why we have chosen to use the results from her morphological analysis as a basis for the identification of issues regarding unintentional events. We found, as Meyer did in her analysis, that when it comes to issues of security it is necessary to do another morphological analysis solely on intentional acts [43 p.14].

6.3.1

Applied to Issues of Safety

In order to create a typology of all events which could affect a nation’s security, Meyer utilised a modified version of morphological analysis, where the only two parameters were cause and primary effect . The values assigned to each parameter are listed below in table 6.2 [43 p.13].

Cause

Primary effect

Meteorological phenomenon

Mass destruction

Geological phenomenon

Larger environmental damage

Cosmic phenomenon

Considerable material damage or economic loss

Biological phenomenon

Loss of societal functions

Technical errors

Lack of vital resources

Human or organisational errors

Public trauma

Politically motivated criminal acts

Weakened physical or psychological integrity

Economically motivated criminal acts

Limitations on national sovereignty

Usurpation of power/sovereignty

Destructively motivated criminal acts

Table 6.2 Matrix for analysis of scenario classes of unintentional events

The scenarios which materialised from this morphological box showed a quite clear distinction between unintentional and intentional events. Many of the causes and effects in the morphological box presuppose a threat actor with intentions and capacities, and would clearly have nothing to do with unintentional events. Many, however, are relevant for issues of safety, and these are the ones of interest to this report. Meyer identified the following scenario classes in the category of unintentional events based on the causes and effects outlined above: natural disasters, failure or malfunction, sudden illness and aggregated individual acts.

The two latter – sudden illness and aggregated individual acts – are deemed not relevant for this study because the risks they pose to the Piql Preservation Services are too implausible or

52

FFI-RAPPORT 16/00707