Timeline of Key Australian Risk Concepts and Events

R2A’s recent work on dam safety led us to develop a timeline of key risk and due diligence concepts and events as they have appeared and influenced Australia. This goes some way to explaining the current divergence between the AS/ISO 31000 hazard-based risk management approach, and the common law and WHS Act precaution-based due diligence approach.In essence, both approaches attempt to demonstrate risk equity, that is, that no one is unreasonably exposed to risk. The key difference between the approaches is that the due diligence approach focuses on ensuring a minimum acceptable level of protection is in place, in the form of precautions. This is an inherently objective test – either the precautions are in place or they are not.In contrast, the hazard-based approach aims to show that a maximum tolerable level of risk is not exceeded, an inherently subjective approach which requires (amongst other things) accurate predictions of the probability of complex potential future events.Both of these approaches have the primary aim: risk equity. However only the precaution-based due diligence approach was developed and has continued to be accepted by the courts and parliaments of Australia, as clearly shown in the timeline below.Blue relates to the precaution-based (SFAIRP) approach, red to the hazard-based (ALARP) approach.1932      Concept of ‘neighbours’ developed for negligence cases in the UK[1].1949      Disproportionality ‘unpacked’ in the Coal Boards case in the UK.[2].1974      ‘So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable’ (SFAIRP) concept introduced in UK safety legislation [3]. This incorporated a demonstration of risk equity in the form of minimum levels of precautions1980      Interpretation of ‘reasonableness’, the common law precautionary balance established by the High Court of Australia (HCA)[4].1982      Issues not ‘remote or fanciful’ must be considered (HCA)[5].1985      Victorian Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Act adopts ‘so far as practicable’[6]1986      Elimination of the remaining ties between the legislature and judiciary of Australia and the UK making the High Court of Australia judicially paramount in Australia[7].1987      UK public inquiry (the Layfield Sizewell B review) recommends the UK Health & Safety Executive (HSE) develop guidance as to the tolerability of safety risk from nuclear power plants.[8]1988      Concept of ‘As Low As Reasonably Practicable’ (ALARP) introduced by UK HSE in response to the Layfield review recommendation. This appears to be an attempt to make safety risk a ‘science’[9] by using target (acceptable or tolerable) levels of risk to demonstrate risk equity.1990      ‘Safety Case’ concept authoritatively articulated in the UK[10].1995      AS4360 risk management standard released, explicitly adopting the ALARP approach[11]. Revised in 1999, retains the ALARP approach[12].2001      That ALARP is equal to SFAIRP formally articulated in UK[13].2004      Maxwell QC reviews failures of acceptable or tolerable risk target approach to safety. Articulates SFAIRP[14]. Equates Victorian OHS Act ‘so far as practicable’ to SFAIRP.2004      AS4360:2004 released, maintaining the ALARP approach[15].2004      Victorian Parliament adopts SFAIRP in legislation[16].2009      AS31000:2009 released, incorporating the ALARP approach from AS4360[17]. This is subsequently referred to in other standards including AS55000:2014 (asset management)[18], and AS5050:2010 (business continuity)[19].2011      Model Work Health and Safety (WHS) legislation adopts SFAIRP approach following the Victorian OH&S Act and due diligence[20] case law.2011      Victorian Government accepts precautionary approach embodied in model WHS legislation by adopting all recommendations of the Powerline Bushfire Safety Taskforce[21].2014      Engineers Australia articulates the difference between SFAIRP and ALARP and issues guidance accordingly[22].Footnotes - [1] UK House of Lords. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100 1932.[2] UK Court of Appeal CA. Edwards v. National Coal Board.[3] UK Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.[4] High Court of Australia. Wyong Shire Council vs Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40.[5] High Court of Australia. Turner v. South Australia (1982) 42 ALR 669.[6] Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985.  Parliament of Victoria.[7] Australia Act 1986 (Cth), Australia Act 1986 (UK).[8] F. H. B. Layfield, Great Britain Department of Energy (1987). Sizewell B Public Inquiry Report.[9] The Tolerability of Risk from Nuclear Power Stations. UK Health and Safety Executive.[10] The Public Inquiry into the Piper Alpha Disaster.  W D Cullen (1990) London. HMSO.[11] AS4360:1995 – Risk management. SAI Global (1995).[12] AS4360:1999 – Risk management. SAI Global (1999).[13] Reducing Risks, Protecting People. UK Health and Safety Directorate (2001).[14] Occupational Health and Safety Act Review. C Maxwell (2004).[15] AS4360:2004 – Risk management. SAI Global (2004).[16] Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004. Act No. 107/2004[17] AS31000:2009 – Risk management – Principles and guidelines. SAI Global (1999).[18] AS55000:2014 – Asset management - Overview, principles and terminology. SAI Global (2014).[19] AS5050:2010 – Business continuity - Managing disruption-related risk. SAI Global (2010).[20] Model Work Health and Safety Bill. 23 June 2011. Safe Work Australia.[21] Victorian Government Response to The Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission Recommendations 27 and 32. December 2011[22] Engineers Australia, Risk Engineering Society (2014). Safety Case Guideline. Third edition.