Performing risk assessment for critical infrastructure protection: an investigation of transnational challenges and human decision-making considerations

References

• Andersson, M. G., Elving, J., Nordkvist, E., Urdl, M., Engblom, L., Mader, A., Ali, B., Kowalczyk, J., Lahrssen‐Wiederholt, M., Tuominen, P., Joutsen, S., Suomi, J., Mikkelä, A., Hinkka, N., Siekkinen, K.-M., der Fels‐Klerx, H. J. V., van den Borne, B., & Ali, B. (2020). Communication inside Risk Assessment and Risk Management (COMRISK). EFSA Supporting Publications, 17(7), 1891E. https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1891
   Google Scholar
• Aven, T. (2017). The flaws of the ISO 31000 conceptualisation of risk. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability, 231(5), 467–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748006X17690672
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aven, T., Andersen, H. B., Cox, T., Droguett, E. L., Greenbergm M., Guikema, S., Kröger, W., McComas, K., Renn, O., M. Thompson, K., & Zio, Eet al. (2018a). Risk Analysis: Fundamental Principles. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from. https://www.sra.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SRA-Fundamental-Principles-R2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Aven, T., Ben-Haim, Y., Andersen, H. B., Cox, T., Droguett, E. L., Greenberg, M., Guikema, S., Kroeger, W., Renn, O., Thompson, K. M., & Zio, E. (2018). SRA glossary. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from. https://www.sra.org/risk-analysis-introduction/risk-analysis-glossary/
   Google Scholar
• Aven, T., & Ylönen, M. (2019). The strong power of standards in the safety and risk fields: A threat to proper developments of these fields? Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 189, 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baggett, R. K., & Stout, A. L. (2022). Critical Infrastructure risk analysis and management. In Masys, A.J. (Eds.), Handbook of Security Science, (pp. 3–22). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51761-2_1-1
   Google Scholar
• Berger, T. B. (2015). Risk assessment competencies of risk management professionals (in Germany). SSRN Electronic Journal. SSRN 2815654. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2815654
   Google Scholar
• Birkmann, J., Feldmeyer, D., McMillan, J. M., Solecki, W., Totin, E., Roberts, D., Trisos, C., Jamshed, A., Boyd, E., & Wrathall, D. (2021). Regional clusters of vulnerability show the need for transboundary cooperation. Environmental Research Letters, 16(9), 094052. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac1f43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackwell, J., Tolone, W. J., Lee, S. W., Xiang, W. N., & Marsh, L. (2009). An ontology-based approach to blind spot revelation in critical infrastructure protection planning. In Setola, R., Geretshuber, S. (Eds.), Critical information infrastructure security: Third international workshop, CRITIS 2008, Rome, Italy, October 13-15 2008 (pp. 352–359). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03552-4_34
   Google Scholar
• Bontempo, R. N., Bottom, W. P., & Weber, E. U. (1997). Cross‐cultural differences in risk perception: A model‐based approach. Risk analysis, 17(4), 479–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00888.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borghetti, F., Marchionni, G., Gugiatti, E., Ambrosi, C., Czerski, D., & Melzi, C. (2020). Cross border critical infrastructure: A new approach for the protection evaluation. Proceedings of the 30th European Safety and Reliability Conference and the 15th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference ESREL 2020 PSAM (Vol. 15ed. pp. 21–26, Venice. June, 2020
   Google Scholar
• Bossong, R. (2014). The European programme for the protection of critical infrastructures–meta-governing a new security problem? European Security, 23(2), 210–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2013.856307
   Google Scholar
• Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J. P. (2007). Social values and material threat: The European Programme for critical infrastructure protection. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 3(3–4), 471–487. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCIS.2007.014121
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge on-line Dictionary. (2021). Transnational. Retrieved December 3, 2021, from. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/transnational
   Google Scholar
• Center For Homeland Defense and Security. (2020). Homeland Threat Assessment. Retrieved December 2, 2021, from. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=845195
   Google Scholar
• Cianni, M., & Wnuck, D. (1997). Individual growth and team enhancement: Moving toward a new model of career development. Academy of Management Perspectives, 11(1), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1997.9707100663
   Google Scholar
• Clemente, D. (2013). Cyber security and global interdependence: What is critical?. Chatham House, Royal Institute of International Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Coman, I. M. (2017). Cross-border cyber-attacks and critical infrastructure protection. International Journal of Information Security and Cybercrime (IJISC), 6(2), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.19107/IJISC.2017.02.07
   Google Scholar
• CORDIS. (2011). European Risk Assessment and Contingency Planning Methodologies for Interconnected energy networks (EURACOM). Retrieved October 29, 2023, from. https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/89833-increasing-the-security-of-europes-energy-supply
   Google Scholar
• Dali, A., & Lajtha, C. (2012). ISO 31000 risk management - “The gold standard”. EDPACS, 45(5), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/07366981.2012.682494
   Google Scholar
• Department of Homeland Security. (2013). NIPP 2013: Partnering for critical infrastructure security and resilience. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/National-Infrastructure-Protection-Plan-2013-508.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Department of Homeland Security. (2021). Transnational crime. (7 Dec. 2021). https://www.dhs.gov/keywords/transnational-crime.(Accessed
   Google Scholar
• Disco, C., & Lintsen, H. W. (1998). Het nijvere verbond. Techniek in Nederland in de twintigste eeuw, 1 https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/134685575/lint011tech01_01.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• ENISA. (2021). European Union Agency for Cybersecurity. Retrieved April 5, 2021, from. https://www.enisa.europa.eu/
   Google Scholar
• Equinor. (2013). Publication of the investigation report on the in Amenas terrorist attack. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from. https://www.equinor.com/news/archive/2013/09/12/12SepInAmenasreport
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2016). VITEX 2016 was the first EU-Wide exercise focused on the effects of large-scale failure of critical (electricity) infrastructure across Europe. Retrieved October 29, 2023, from. https://erncip-project.jrc.ec.europa.eu/events/vitex-2016-was-first-eu-wide-exercise-focussed-effects-large-scale-failure-critical
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2019a). Commission notice - reporting guidelines on disaster risk management. Art. 6(1)d of decision No 1313/2013/EU (2019/C 428/07). Official Journal of the European Union 20.12.2019, C 428/8-33.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2019b). Critical infrastructure protection. Retrieved May 13, 2021, from. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/research-topic/critical-infrastructure-protection
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2022). Opening remarks by commissioner Johansson at the press conference on EU critical infrastructure resilience. Retrieved November 27, 2022, from. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_22_6265
   Google Scholar
• European Council. (2008). Directive 2008/114 - Identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection. Retrieved July 2, 2021, from. https://www.eumonitor.eu/9353000/1/j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vitgbgipfoqy#p3
   Google Scholar
• Eusgeld, I., Nan, C., & Dietz, S. (2011). “System-of-systems” approach for interdependent critical infrastructures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(6), 679–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2010.12.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairbrother, A., Kapustka, L. A., Williams, B. A., & Glicken, J. (1995). Risk assessment in practice: Success and failure. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 1(4), 367–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039509380021
   Google Scholar
• Fischerkeller, M. P., & Harknett, R. J. (2017). Deterrence is not a credible strategy for cyberspace. Orbis, 61(3), 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2017.05.003
   Google Scholar
• Fischoff, B. (1984). Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fritzon, Å., Ljungkvist, K., Boin, A., & Rhinard, M. (2007). Protecting Europe’s critical infrastructures: Problems and prospects. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 15(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2007.00502.x
   Google Scholar
• Gaiser, L. (2018). European critical infrastructure protection: The need for a regional approach and a cyber constant contact strategy. National Security and the Future, 19(1–2), 45–63.
   Google Scholar
• Giannopoulos, G., Filippini, R., & Schimmer, M. (2012). Risk assessment methodologies for Critical Infrastructure Protection. Part I: A state of the art. JRC Technical Notes, 1(1), 1–53.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greener, S. (2018). Research limitations: The need for honesty and common sense. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(5), 567–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1486785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh, T., Thorne, S., & Malterud, K. (2018). Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 48(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12931
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammond-Errey, M., & Ray, K. (2021). A new methodology for strategic assessment of transnational threats. Police Practice & Research, 22(1), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2019.1699411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heino, O., Takala, A., Jukarainen, P., Kalalahti, J., Kekki, T., & Verho, P. (2019). Critical infrastructures: The operational environment in cases of severe disruption. Sustainability, 11(3), 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermansson, H. (2012). Defending the conception of “objective risk”. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01682.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Högselius, P., Hommels, A., Kaijser, A., & Van der Vleuten, E. (Eds). (2013). The making of Europe’s critical infrastructure: Common connections and shared vulnerabilities. Palgrave Macmillan, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Homeland Security. (n.d.). National infrastructure protection plan - risk management framework. https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_RiskMgmt.pdf. ( Accessed 12 Sept 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Houghton, S. M., Simon, M., Aquino, K., & Goldberg, C. B. (2000). No safety in numbers: Persistence of biases and their effects on team risk perception and team decision making. Group & Organization Management, 25(4), 325–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601100254002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutten, J. C., Van Horn, J. E., Uzieblo, K., van der Veeken, F. C., & Bouman, Y. H. (2022). Toward a risk management strategy: A narrative review of methods for translation of risk assessment into risk management. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, 22(5), 444–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2021.2013359
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Strategic Risk Management. (2023). ISRM amenas case study. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from. https://www.theisrm.org/en/amenas-case-study
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (1991). Cross-national differences in policy implementation. Evaluation Review, 15(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9101500106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246(1), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0182-160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klaver, M. H. A., Luiijf, H. A. M., Nieuwenhuijs, A. H., Cavenne, F., Ulisse, A., & Bridegeman, G. (2008). European risk assessment methodology for critical infrastructures. 2008 First International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services: Building Networks for a Brighter Future (INFRA) (pp. 1–5). Rotterdam, Netrherlands: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/infra.2008.5439614.
   Google Scholar
• Kogan, E. (2014). Expert opinion - trilateral military and energy security co-operation: Reactions from Moscow and Washington, Georgian foundation for strategic and international studies. Retrieved May 31, 2022, from. https://gfsis.org.ge/files/library/opinion-papers/17-expert-opinion-eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lambrechts, D., & Blomquist, L. B. (2017). Political–security risk in the oil and gas industry: The impact of terrorism on risk management and mitigation. Journal of Risk Research, 20(10), 1320–1337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2016.1153502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazari, A. (2014). European critical infrastructure protection. Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, R. (2015). Closing the case on the reported 2008 Russian cyber attack on the BTC pipeline June 15, 2015. Retrieved March 26, 2024, from. https://www.sans.org/blog/closing-the-case-on-the-reported-2008-russian-cyber-attack-on-the-btc-pipeline/
   Google Scholar
• Lidskog, R., Soneryd, L., Uggla, Y., & Irwin, A. (2009). Transboundary risk governance. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Linnerooth-Bayer, J., & Sjostedt, G. (Eds.). (2010). Transboundary risk management. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luiijf, E., & Klaver, M. (2021). Analysis and lessons identified on critical infrastructures and dependencies from an empirical data set. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 35, 100471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2021.100471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyon, B. K., & Hollcroft, B. (2012). Risk Assessments. Professional Safety, 57(12), 28–34.
   Google Scholar
• May, P. J., & Koski, C. (2013). Addressing public risks: Extreme events and critical infrastructures. Review of Policy Research, 30(2), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mousavi, S., & Gigerenzer, G. (2014). Risk, uncertainty, and heuristics. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1671–1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murata, A., Nakamura, T., & Karwowski, W. (2015). Influence of cognitive biases in distorting decision making and leading to critical unfavorable incidents. Safety, 1(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety1010044
   Google Scholar
• Pachur, T., Hertwig, R., & Steinmann, F. (2012). How do people judge risks: Availability heuristic, affect heuristic, or both? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(3), 314. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N., & O’Leary, M. (2000). Man-made disasters: Why technology and organizations (sometimes) fail. Safety Science, 34(1–3), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00004-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poljanšek, K., Casajus Valles, A., Marin Ferrer, M., De Jager, A., Dottori, F., Galbusera, L., Garcia Puerta, B., Giannopoulos, G., Girgin, S., Hernandez Ceballos, M., Iurlaro, G., Karlos, V., Krausmann, E., Larcher, M., Lequarre, A., Theocharidou, M., Montero Prieto, M., Naumann, G., Necci, A., Salamon, P., Sangiorgi, M., Raposo De M. Do N. E S. De Sotto Mayor, M., Trueba Alonso, C., Tsionis, G., Vogt, J. & Wood, M. (2019). Recommendations for national risk assessment for disaster risk management in EU. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.2760/147842JRC114650
   Google Scholar
• Pursiainen, C., & Kytömaa, E. (2023). From European critical infrastructure protection to the resilience of European critical entities: What does it mean? Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure, 8(sup1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/23789689.2022.2128562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pursiainen, C., & Rød, B. (2021). National disaster risk assessments in Europe. How comparable are they and why? Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 12(2), 194–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, S. G. (2000). Acceptable risk criteria. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 2(2), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/1528-2716(200004/06)2:2<254:AID-PSE30>3.0.CO;2-K
   Google Scholar
• Renda, A., & Haemmerli, B. (2010). Protecting critical infrastructure in the EU: CEPS task force report. Retrieved October 22, 2021, from. https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/protecting-critical-infrastructure-eu/,2010
   Google Scholar
• Rinaldi, S. M., Peerenboom, J. P., & Kelly, T. K. (2001). Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rød, B., Lange, D., Theocharidou, M., & Pursiainen, C. (2020). From risk management to resilience management in critical infrastructure. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(4), 04020039. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roe, E., & Schulman, P. R. (2018). A reliability & risk framework for the assessment and management of system risks in critical infrastructures with central control rooms. Safety Science, 110, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rohrmann, B. (2000). Cross-cultural studies on the perception and evaluation of hazards. In: Renn, O., Rohrmann, B. (Eds.), Cross-Cultural Risk Perception. Technology, Risk, and Society (pp. 103–143). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4891-8_3
   Google Scholar
• Sachs, M. (2022). Reflections on executive order 13010. Retrieved October 9, 2022, from. https://mccrary.auburn.edu/work/insights/reflections-on-executive-order-13010/
   Google Scholar
• Schäferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. (2009). Transnational public-private partnerships in international relations: Making sense of concepts, research frameworks, and results. International Studies Review, 11(3), 451–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00869.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwenk, C. H. (1986). Information, cognitive biases, and commitment to a course of action. Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/258461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shefrin, H. (2015). How psychological pitfalls generated the global financial crisis. In Laurence B. S (Ed.), The Routledge companion to strategic risk management (pp. 289–315). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Skagerlund, K., Forsblad, M., Slovic, P., & Västfjäll, D. (2020). The affect heuristic and risk perception–stability across elicitation methods and individual cognitive abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 970. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skogstad, G. (2003). Legitimacy and/or policy effectiveness?: Network governance and GMO regulation in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(3), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176032000085333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P. (2000). The Perception of Risk. www.routledge.com
   Google Scholar
• Slovic, P. (2020). Risk perception and risk analysis in a hyperpartisan and virtuously violent world. Risk analysis, 40(S1), 2231–2239. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13606
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Slovic, P., Baruch Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Rating the Risks. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 21(3), 14–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1979.9933091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The affect heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(3), 1333–1352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1981). Rating the Risks. In Y. Y. Haimes (Ed.), Risk/Benefit analysis in water resources planning and management (pp. 193–217). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2168-0_17
   Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982). Why study risk perception? Risk analysis, 2(2), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01369.x
   Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Layman, M., & Flynn, J. H. (1991). Risk perception, trust, and nuclear waste: Lessons from Yucca Mountain. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 33(3), 6–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1991.9931375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sofaer, A. D., & Goodman, S. E. (2001). Cyber crime and security. The transnational dimension. In A.D. Sofaer & S.E. Goodman (Eds), The Transnational Dimension of Cyber-Crime and Terrorism, (pp. 1–34). Hoover Institution Press. https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/metabook?id=hoovercyber.
   Google Scholar
• Sonesson, T. R., Johansson, J., & Cedergren, A. (2021). Governance and interdependencies of critical infrastructures: Exploring mechanisms for cross-sector resilience. Safety Science, 142, 105383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starr, S. & Cornell, S. (2005). The baku-tbilisi-ceyhan pipeline: Oil window to the west. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program. (Accessed 20 September. https://www.silkroadstudies.org/resources/pdf/Monographs/2005_01_MONO_Starr-Cornell_BTC-Pipeline.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Statoil. (2013). The in Amenas report, report on the investigation into the terrorist attack on in Amenas. Prepared for statoil ASA’s board of directors. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from. https://www.equinor.com/news/archive/2013/09/12/downloads/In%20Amenas%20report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stockton, P., & Roberts, P. (2008). Findings from the Forum on Homeland Security after the Bush Administration: Next steps in building unity of effort. Homeland Security Affairs, 4(2). Article 4 (June 2008). https://www.hsaj.org/articles/121
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Precautions against what? the availability heuristic and cross-cultural risk perception. SSRN Electronic Journal, 57, 75. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.578303
   Google Scholar
• Theocharidou, M., & Giannopoulos, G. (2015). Risk assessment methodologies for critical infrastructure protection. Part II: A new approach. Scientific and Technical Research Reports, Report EUR 27332 EN. https://doi.org/10.2788/621843
   Google Scholar
• Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The cognitive reflection test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39(7), 1275–1289. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trumbo, C., Lueck, M., Marlatt, H., & Peek, L. (2011). The effect of proximity to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on subsequent hurricane outlook and optimistic bias. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(12), 1907–1918. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01633.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulusan, A., Ergun, O., & He, Z. (2018). Restoration of services in disrupted infrastructure systems: A network science approach. Public Library of Science ONE, 13(2), e0192272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192272
   Google Scholar
• US Congress. (2021). Public law 107-56 uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism (USA Patriot Act) Act of 2001. Retrieved October 23, 2021, from. https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ56/PLAW-107publ56.pdf
   Google Scholar
• US Election Assistance Commission. (2017). History of critical Infrastructure designation. Retrieved October 23, 2021, from. https://www.eac.gov/ci-scoop-history-of-critical-infrastructure-designation
   Google Scholar
• Van der Vleuten, E., & Disco, C. (2004). Water wizards: Reshaping wet nature and society. History and Technology, 20(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/0734151042000287014
   Google Scholar
• Van der Vleuten, E., & Lagendijk, V. (2010a). Interpreting transnational infrastructure vulnerability: European blackout and the historical dynamics of transnational electricity governance. Energy Policy, 38(4), 2053–2062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Vleuten, E., & Lagendijk, V. (2010b). Transnational infrastructure vulnerability: The historical shaping of the 2006 European “blackout”. Energy Policy, 38(4), 2042–2052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Eeten, M., Nieuwenhuijs, A., Luiijf, E., Klaver, M., & Cruz, E. (2011). The state and the threat of cascading failure across critical infrastructures: The implications of empirical evidence from media incident reports. Public Administration, 89(2), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01926.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Schaik, P., Renaud, K., Wilson, C., Jansen, J., & Onibokun, J. (2020). Risk as affect: The affect heuristic in cybersecurity. Computers & Security, 90, 101651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2019.101651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varma, R., & Varma, D. R. (2005). The Bhopal disaster of 1984. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 25(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467604273822
   Google Scholar
• Veland, H., & Aven, T. (2015). Improving the risk assessments of critical operations to better reflect uncertainties and the unforeseen. Safety Science, 79, 206–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.06.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vertovec, S. (1999). Conceiving and researching transnationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 447–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/014198799329558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, E. U., & Hsee, C. (1998). Cross-cultural differences in risk perception, but cross-cultural similarities in attitudes towards perceived risk. Management science, 44(9), 1205–1217. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.9.1205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White House. (1998). Presidential decision directive NSC-63: Critical infrastructure protection. Retrieved October 22, 2021, from. https://irp.fas.org/offdocs/pdd/pdd-63.htm
   Google Scholar
• Yildiz, A. E., Dikmen, I., & Birgonul, M. T. (2014). Using expert opinion for risk assessment: A case study of a construction project utilizing a risk mapping tool. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 519–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.058
   Google Scholar
• Yu, Y., Chan, A. P., Chen, C., & Darko, A. (2018). Critical risk factors of transnational public–private partnership projects: Literature review. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 24(1), 04017042. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yusta, J. M., Correa, G. J., & Lacal-Arántegui, R. (2011). Methodologies and applications for critical infrastructure protection: State-of-the-art. Energy Policy, 39(10), 6100–6119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zio, E. (2016). Challenges in the vulnerability and risk analysis of critical infrastructures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 152, 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar