Abstract
The multi-risk and multi-hazard analysis replace the single processes analysis as a natural continuation of risk perception in risk management. The separation of hazards is substituted by pooling the hazards into the categories based on various criteria. This transition from understanding the hazards as interrelated subjects raise numerous questions, for example: Based on what criteria should hazards be separated? Is it the obvious interconnection of action and reaction or should they be sorted by the risk level? In our article, we focus on description of mutual hazards' relationships that can be studied by their cascade and synergy effects if they manifest.
This approach allows to consider multiplied impact of hazards manifested in some protected area. The consideration of the cascade and synergy effects illustrate the force of some particular hazard on the network of its impact. Relations are determined ad hoc, by means of estimations made by experts. Subsequently, there is calculated the average of thus obtained values and used as an activity, respectively a passivity coefficient. This way each risk connected with particular hazard is enriched with two values, which should clarify its impact. Obviously, there are two main insufficiencies. First, the usage of any estimation carries out subjectivity of experts that needs to be treated in proper way. Secondly, computing the average of given values does not include any information about the importance, meaning or weight of grouped hazards.
