Citation

Kaplan S. Reliab. Eng. 1982; 3(4): 267-277.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1982, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/0143-8174(82)90012-9

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A discussion is given of the question of safety goals and the related questions 'How much risk is acceptable?' and 'How safe is safe enough?'. Taken at face value, these questions are misleading and illogical in that, in isolation, no risk is acceptable and nothing is ever safe enough. Thus, the old regulatory concept of pass-fail criteria based on risk alone is unworkable and should be replaced by one based on the best cost-benefit-risk mix of all available options.