Case Study 2: Cash Depot and Third Party Risk
A company, NOKAS, performs both Norwegian central bank tasks and other cash processing services for private banks. In April 2004 NOKAS was just to move into new premises in the city of Stavanger when a robbery at one of the existing facilities took place.
- PDF / 119,160 Bytes
- 13 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 116 Downloads / 181 Views
Case Study 2: Cash Depot and Third Party Risk
12.1
Pre-assessment
A company, NOKAS, performs both Norwegian central bank tasks and other cash processing services for private banks. In April 2004 NOKAS was just to move into new premises in the city of Stavanger when a robbery at one of the existing facilities took place. Approximately seven million Euros were taken, and one policeman was killed during the attack. This brutal robbery gave rise to a huge concern among the neighbors of the new NOKAS facility which resides in a residential area, and is located only eight metres from a kindergarten. The risk decision problem can be formulated as follows: Is the risk for the neighbors acceptable? Should the NOKAS facility be moved? Should risk reducing measures be implemented? The problem is categorized as both an uncertainty induced problem and a normative ambiguity induced problem. There are large uncertainties about the possible occurrence of an attack (robbery) in the future and the possible consequences. If we look at all such companies in Norway, it is very difficult to predict the number of robberies and the form they will take during the next 10 years. The statistical data are not necessarily relevant. The criminal groups develop, and who knows their coming strategies? For example, will it be more common to take hostages? This is also a normative ambiguity induced problem as there are different stakeholders views related to the values to be protected and the priorities to be made. The main stakeholders are the neighbors, the NOKAS Company and the politicians. The case raises a number of interesting issues, including: l
l
Should a technical risk assessment be carried out? And if yes, how should risk be described? How should risk acceptance be judged?
In the following we review and discuss the way the risk assessments and the risk management (government) process were carried out in this case. Our starting point is the description of the analysis (the analysis process) as it was carried out in 2005
T. Aven and O. Renn, Risk Management and Governance, Risk, Governance and Society 16, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-13926-0_12, # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010
215
216
12 Case Study 2: Cash Depot and Third Party Risk
(Vatn 2005, 2007). We have, however, made some adjustments, to be in line with the principles adopted in this book (based on Aven 2008a). The presentation shows only excerpts from the assessments and the process, it is simplified, and all the numbers have been changed. We refer the reader to Sect. 12.3.2 for some comments regarding the differences between our presentation and the original assessment. The objective of the assessment is to present a risk picture with respect to third parties, i.e. the residents of the area (called Frøystad), children and the staff at the kindergarten, including the parents of children attending the kindergarten. The assessments build on: l l l l l
System knowledge concerning the design and operation of the NOKAS facility Relevant statistical material relating to ro
Data Loading...
