Cindynics for all  

Context

At the end of 1980, Georges-Yves Kervern  accomplished a huge work of  conceptualization of danger and risk notions.

Starting from analysis of any kind of risk, he created the science of dangers.This analysis is recounted in « L’Archipel du danger » (G-Y Kervern, P. Rubise – Editions Economica 1991). He highlight the danger notion whose « man  has decupled the sources “. Consequently before facing the risk, one must define the danger, that is to identify the danger in order to decrease the negative consequences 

Carrying on their investigations, the authors consider that accident studies reveal 3 parameters which may be at the origin : the product, the environment and the behaviour. In order to accomplish a prevention, one must play with this trilogy.

Nowadays still, as a rule risk studies deal easily with the two fist parameters, the link with the beheavior is often ignored. Hence the usual model of graphic display of consequences generated by transformation of dangers into risks leans upon two criteria only :

• the probability of occurrence of observable event which provokes the transformation of danger into risk,
• The gravity of generated damages .

 The behavior factors escape from this twofold analysis, the cindynicians will describe the dangers, being observable or masked, leaning on two approaches:

• analyse thoroughly reports and catastrophes which systematically reveal interrogations ethic, philosophic and ethical and take them into account .
• decode the inobservable using description theory issued from quantic mechanic

 These approaches allow evolution of technical model of risk graphic representation. Progressively technical criteria have been enriched due to contribution of purposes, values and rules aspects, technical criteria becoming related to data and models.

Cindynic concepts issued from these latest elements have been dealt with in various papers and books whose logic and impact have been hardly understood. Besides the display mode of these concepts were only applicable to post accidental analysis, so that cindynic sciences ill understood have been disparaged or even rejected.

IMdR considers that these concepts deserve to be better known and appreciated, for they allow to describe imperceptible dangers linked to behavior of each of the actors networks which intervene in a system as well as “their tangle which make the human society complexity”. The psychosocietal risks study should be an illustration.

Objectives

The aim of cindynic concepts exploration by WG is as follows :

• To render them accessible to people who want to use this approach to better estimate the importance of danger potentials which exist in every organization type,
• To show that these concepts are equally usable in prevention,
• To carry on G-Y Kervern works who considered that huge progress remain to be done in conceptualization of  unwished events: incidents, accidents, catastrophes, apocalypse, a.s.o.

The WG is also ambitious : 

•  to recreate an exchange place around the cindynic sciences,
• to facilitate relationship between sectors interested by cindynic approaches,
• to develop training to cindynic concepts
• to  incite to publish books including cindynics thematics

 Proposed work method

• establish the state of the art in cindynic domain
• examine examples where cindynic concepts can be applied in prevention,
• list fields where cindynic application brings solutions,
• conceptualize transformation of situations from danger to risk situation.

Complements could be studied on participants wishes.

Expected products and aimed audience

The expected products are as follows :

• concepts popularization document,
• study of transformation from danger to risk situation: application to psychosocietal risks,
• IMdR working day realization
• Training program proposal

 

This working group, open to IMdR adherents, is certainly of interest to you, please contact  G. PLANCHETTE