| 1. |
- Colon, Celian, et al.
(författare)
-
Fragmentation of production amplifies systemic risks from extreme events in supply-chain networks
- 2020
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science. - 1932-6203. ; 15:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Climatic and other extreme events threaten the globalized economy, which relies on increasingly complex and specialized supply-chain networks. Disasters generate (i) direct economic losses due to reduced production in the locations where they occur, and (ii) to indirect losses from the supply shortages and demand changes that cascade along the supply chains. Firms can use inventories to reduce their risk of shortages. Since firms are interconnected through the supply chain, the level of inventory hold by one firm influences the risk of shortages of the others. Such interdependencies lead to systemic risks in supply chain networks. We introduce a stylized model of complex supply-chain networks in which firms adjust their inventory to maximize profit. We analyze the resulting risks and inventory patterns using evolutionary game theory. We report the following findings. Inventories significantly reduce disruption cascades and indirect losses at the expense of a moderate increase in direct losses. The more fragmented a supply chain is, the less beneficial it is for individual firms to maintain inventories, resulting in higher systemic risks. One way to mitigate such systemic risks is to prescribe inventory sizes to individual firms—a measure that could, for instance, be fostered by insurers. We found that prescribing firm-specific inventory sizes based on their position in the supply chain mitigates systemic risk more effectively than setting the same inventory requirements for all firms.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hochrainer-Stigler, Stefan, et al.
(författare)
-
Measuring, modeling, and managing systemic risk : the missing aspect of human agency
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk Research. - : Routledge. - 1366-9877 .- 1466-4461. ; 23:10, s. 1301-1317
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- It is problematic to treat systemic risk as a merely technical problem that can be solved by natural-science methods and through biological and ecological analogies. There appears to be a discrepancy between understanding systemic risk from a natural-science perspective and the unresolved challenges that arise when humans with their initiatives and interactions are included in systemic-risk considerations. It is therefore necessary to investigate possible fundamental differences and similarities of systemic risk with and without accounting for human involvement. Focusing on applied and implementation aspects of measuring, modeling, and managing systemic risks, we identify three important and distinct features characterizing such fundamental differences: indetermination, indecision, and responsibility. We contend that, first, including human initiatives and interactions in systemic-risk considerations must emphasize a type of variability that is especially relevant in this context, namely the role of free will as a fundamental source of essential indetermination in human agency. Second, we postulate that collective indecision generated by mutual uncertainty often leads to the suspension or alteration of rules, procedures, scripts, and norms. Consequently, the associated systemic risks cannot be incorporated into explanatory models, as the new causal rules cannot be predicted and accounted for. Third, analogies from biology and ecology, especially the idea of ‘contagion,’ downplay human agency, and therefore human responsibility, promoting the false belief that systemic risk is a merely technical problem. For each of these three features, we provide recommendations for future directions and suggest how measuring, modeling, and managing approaches from the natural-science domain can best be applied in light of human agency.
|
|
