Benchmark analysis for quantifying urban vulnerability to terrorist incidents

Risk Analysis

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1411-1425

  Piegorsch, Walter W ^a   Cutter, Susan L ^b   Hardisty, Frank ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Benchmark index; Complementary log log model; Homeland security; Urban vulnerability analysis

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXIC MATERIALS;

BENCHMARK ANALYSIS; BENCHMARK INDEX; COMPLEMENTARY LOG-LOG MODELS; HOMELAND SECURITY; HUMAN CASUALTIES; LINEAR STATISTICAL MODELS; TERRORIST INCIDENTS; URBAN VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS;

RISK ANALYSIS;

BENCHMARKING; PARADIGM SHIFT; RISK ASSESSMENT; TERRORISM; VULNERABILITY;

ACCIDENT; ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; DATA BASE; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; METHODOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL SECURITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TERRORISM; UNITED STATES; URBAN AREA; VULNERABLE POPULATION;

BENCHMARKING; DATABASES, FACTUAL; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; RISK; TERRORISM; UNITED STATES; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 37249009200     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00977.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Apostolakis, E., & Lemon, D. M. (2005). A screening methodology for the identification and ranking of infrastructure vulnerabilities due to terrorism. Risk Analysis, 25, 361 376.
2. Bailer, A. J., Noble, R. B., & Wheeler, M. W. (2005). Model uncertainty and risk estimation for experimental studies of quantal responses. Risk Analysis, 25, 291 299.
3. Barnes, D. G., Daston, G. P., Evans, J. S., Jarabek, A. M., Kavlock, R. J., Kimmel, C. A., Park, C., & Spitzer, H. L. (1995). Benchmark dose workshop - Criteria for use of a benchmark dose to estimate a reference dose. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 21, 296 306.
4. Bogen, K. T., & Jones, E. D. (2006). Risks of mortality and morbidity from worldwide terrorism: 1968-2004. Risk Analysis, 26, 45 59.
5. Borden, K., Schmidtlein, M. C., Emrich, C. T., Piegorsch, W. W., & Cutter, S. L. (2007). Natural hazards vulnerability in U.S. cities. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 4, Art. 5. Available at http://www.bepress.com/jhsem/vol4/issz/5/.
6. Crump, K. S. (1984). A new method for determining allowable daily intake. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 4, 854 871.
7. Crump, K. S. (1995). Calculation of benchmark doses from continuous data. Risk Analysis, 15, 79 89.
8. Crump, K. S. (2002). Benchmark analysis. In A. H. El-Shaarawi, & W. W. Piegorsch (Eds. Encyclopedia of Environmetrics pp. 163 170). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
9. Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. J., & Shirley, W. L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 242 261.
10. Deisler, P. F., Jr. 2002). A perspective: Risk analysis as a tool for reducing the risks of terrorism. Risk Analysis, 22, 405 413.
11. Falk Filipsson, A., Sand, S., Nilsson, J., & Victorin, K. (2003). The benchmark dose method - Review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 33, 505 542.
12. Faustman, E. M., & Bartell, S. M. (1997). Review of noncancer risk assessment: Applications of benchmark dose methods. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 3, 893 920.
13. Gaylor, D. W., & Aylward, L. L. (2004). An evaluation of benchmark dose methodology for non-cancer continuous-data health effects in animals due to exposures to dioxin (TCDD). Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 40, 9 17.
14. Gephart, L. A., Salminen, W. F., Nicolich, M. J., & Pelekis, M. (2001). Evaluation of subchronic toxicity data using the benchmark dose approach. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 33, 37 59.
15. Guess, H. A., Crump, K. S., & Peto, R. (1977). Uncertainty estimates for low-dose extrapolation of animal carcinogenicity data. Cancer Research, 37, 3475 3483.
16. Harner, J., Warner, K., Pierce, J., & Huber, T. (2002). Urban environmental justice indices. Professional Geographer, 54, 318 331.
17. Jørgensen, B. (2002). Generalized linear models. In A. H. El-Shaarawi & W. W. Piegorsch (Eds. Encyclopedia of Environmetrics, 2 (pp. 873 880). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
18. Kunreuther, H. (2002a). The role of insurance in managing extreme events: Implications for terrorism coverage. Risk Analysis, 22, 427 437.
19. Kunreuther, H. (2002b). Risk analysis and risk management in an uncertain world. Risk Analysis, 22, 655 664.
20. Kunreuther, H., & Michel-Kerjan, E. (2004). Challenges for terrorism risk insurance in the United States. Journal of Economic Perspective, 18, 201 214.
21. LaFree, G., Dugan, L., Fogg, H. V., & Scott, J. (2006). Building a Global Terrorism Database. Report #NCJ 214260, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice/NCJRS, Rockville, MD.
22. Morales, K. H., & Ryan, L. M. (2005). Benchmark dose estimation based on epidemiologic cohort data. Environmetrics, 16, 435 447.
23. Nitcheva, D. K., Piegorsch, W. W., West, R. W., & Kodell, R. L. (2005). Multiplicity-adjusted inferences in risk assessment: Benchmark analysis with quantal response data. Biometrics, 61, 277 286.
24. Parham, F., & Portier, C. J. (2005). Benchmark dose approach. In L. Edler & C. Kitsos (Eds Recent Advances in Quantitative Methods in Cancer and Human Health Risk Assessment (pp. 239 254). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
25. Peng, R. D., Schoenberg, F. P., & Woods, J. A. (2005). A space-time conditional intensity model for evaluating a wildfire hazard index. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 26 35.
26. Piegorsch, W. W., & Bailer, A. J. (2005). Analyzing Environmental Data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
27. Piegorsch, W. W., & West, R. W. (2005). Benchmark analysis: Shopping with proper confidence. Risk Analysis, 25, 913 920.
28. Reid, E., Qin, J. L., Chung, W. Y., Xu, J., Zhou, Y. L., Schumaker, R., Sageman, M., & Chen, H. C. (2004). Terrorism knowledge discovery project: A knowledge discovery approach to addressing the threats of terrorism. Intelligence And Security Informatics, Proceedings. Lecture Notes In Computer Science, 3073, 125 145.
29. Sand, S., Falk Filipsson, A., & Victorin, K. (2002). Evaluation of the benchmark dose method for dichotomous data: Model dependence and model selection. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 36, 184 197.
30. Sand, S. J., von Rosen, D., & Falk Filipsson, A. (2003). Benchmark calculations in risk assessment using continuous dose-response information: The influence of variance and the determination of a cut-off value. Risk Analysis, 23, 1059 1068.
31. Sarewitz, D., Pielke, R., & Keykhah, M. (2003). Vulnerability and risk: Some thoughts from a political and policy perspective. Risk Analysis, 23, 805 810.
32. ® User's Guide, Version 8, Volumes 1, 2, and 3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
33. Schlosser, P. M., Lilly, P. D., Conolly, R. B., Janszen, D. B., & Kimbell, J. S. (2003). Benchmark dose risk assessment for formaldehyde using airflow modeling and a single-compartment, DNA-protein cross-link dosimetry model to estimate human equivalent doses. Risk Analysis, 23, 473 487.
34. See, K., & Bailer, A. J. (1998). Added risk and inverse estimation for count responses in reproductive aquatic toxicology studies. Biometrics, 54, 67 73.
35. Srebotnjak, T. (2008). Environmental performance index. In B. Everitt, & E. Melnick (Eds. Encyclopedia of Quantitative Risk Analysis and Assessment. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, in press.
36. Starr, T. B., Goodman, J. I., & Hoel, D. G. (2005). Uses of benchmark dose methodology in quantitative risk assessment. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 42, 1 2.
37. Tsuzuki, Y. (2006). An index directly indicates land-based pollutant load contributions of domestic wastewater to the water pollution and its application. Science of the Total Environment, 370, 425 440.
38. U.S. EPA 2000). Benchmark Dose Technical Guidance Document. Report #EPA/630/R-00/001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.