There are various risk assessment activities that must occur before any environmental design is implemented. There are four main stages that must occur in order to perform an effective risk assessment, they include; planning the risk assessment, performing the risk assessment, reviewing the risk assessment documents, and lastly, issuing the risk assessment (Poulin & Charles, 2005). These four steps are essential in ensuring the safety and welfare of all involved.
Planning a risk assessment involves, determining environmental concerns that could present problems, as well as identifying appropriate goals, resources, and participants. Planning serves as a sound foundation for the implementation of any risk assessment. While planning the risk assessment it is also imperative to allocate all resources, both technical and financial, while also determining the participants communications needs (Poulin & Charles, 2005). Lastly, an agreement of the scope, complexity, and focus of the risk assessment must be achieved by those participants involved.
The second course of action includes actually performing the risk assessment. Whilst performing the risk assessment, data and information must be collected, as well as the development and validation of the risk assessment model. Once the data is collected and the developed model has been validated, the results must be reviewed.
When performing the third step in the risk assessment process, reviewing, it is imperative in preparing the release of documents to the public. The reviewing phase involves peer review and agency clearance. The reviewing phase may occur at various phases of the assessment, and sometimes could entail complete revision of the risk assessment model developed.
Lastly, the fourth and final stage in the risk assessment process is issuing the risk assessment documents. This process includes the implementation of the risk assessment, as well as addressing any public concerns. The primary focus at this stage is implementing specified activities concerning the assessment to the public.
Environmental designers should always avoid plans that give the public an image of lockdown or military control, primarily because of the public’s reaction to such scenes. For example, if a city has been locked down, in order to not incite fear into the minds of the public, military personal could be placed at certain “unnoticeable” areas of town, whilst officials dress as citizens and patrol within the more populated areas of the town (Poulin & Charles, 2005).
Furthermore, it is crucial not to incite fear in the minds of the public because of certain repercussions that could occur. For instance, if a major city was totally locked down due to a pandemic, such as a fast spreading lethal virus, displaying military force could advocate violence amongst large portions of the public, resulting in a revolution.
Finally, environmental designers should avoid plans that give an image of military lockdown due to the fact that the main objective in any mission always is to maintain the order, safety, and security of those participants involved, whether they are civilians or military personnel.
K.C. Poulin & Charles P. Nemeth, (2005) Private Security and Public Safety: A Community-Based Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc