Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
Importancia de la valoración de riesgos a nivel sectorial, una aproximación más allá del código PBIP
| dc.contributor.advisor | Puentes, Julian | spa |
| dc.contributor.author | Medina Cepeda, Neill Adolfo | |
| dc.contributor.other | Silva, Juan | spa |
| dc.coverage.spatial | Calle 100 | spa |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-04-01T15:01:08Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-12-30T19:21:18Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-04-01T15:01:08Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-12-30T19:21:18Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018-06-14 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10654/20838 | |
| dc.description.abstract | La valoración de riesgos es un proceso fundamental en la gestión del riesgo de cualquier organización. Se caracteriza por su complejidad, subjetividad y desarrollo bajo diferentes enfoques, alcances y criterios. Al momento de seleccionar un modelo para valorar riesgos a nivel activo o instalación, se deben considerar unos factores básicos; pero, al hacerla para proteger activos estratégicos o infraestructura crítica sectorial o nacional, se deben incluir criterios adicionales sobre sensibilidad, dominio de aplicación, audiencia, dependencias y capacidad de resiliencia. Desde esta óptica, la valoración de riesgos que actualmente se hace en el sector portuario colombiano se limita al alcance establecido por el código PBIP y es insuficiente para diseñar planes de protección sectorial. Valoraciones de riesgo a este nivel deben contemplar factores como dependencias, interdependencias y capacidad de resiliencia del sector con el fin de servir de base para planes de protección a nivel sectorial y nacional. | spa |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 1. La gestión del riesgo, conceptos básicos 2. La valoración de riesgos de seguridad o VRS 2.1 Criterios fundamentales 2.2 Algunos modelos básicos e intermedios de VRS 3. Transporte marítimo, sector portuario y código PBIP 3.1 Transporte marítimo internacional 3.2 El sector portuario colombiano 3.3 El código PBIP y las instalaciones portuarias 4. La valoración de riesgos desde la perspectiva sectorial 16 4.1 Criterios complementarios 4.2 Algunos modelos avanzados de VRS 5. Conclusiones Bibliografía | spa |
| dc.format | spa | |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | spa |
| dc.language.iso | spa | spa |
| dc.language.iso | spa | spa |
| dc.publisher | Universidad Militar Nueva Granada | spa |
| dc.rights | Derechos Reservados - Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, 2018 | spa |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/co/ | spa |
| dc.title | Importancia de la valoración de riesgos a nivel sectorial, una aproximación más allá del código PBIP | spa |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis | spa |
| dc.rights.accessrights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | spa |
| dc.subject.lemb | ADMINISTRACION DE RIESGOS | spa |
| dc.subject.lemb | PUERTOS | spa |
| dc.publisher.department | Facultad de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad | spa |
| dc.type.local | Trabajo de grado | spa |
| dc.description.abstractenglish | Risk assessment is a fundamental process in the risk management of any organization. It is characterized by its complexity, subjectivity and development under different approaches, scope and criteria. When selecting a model to assess risks at an active or installation level, basic factors must be considered; However, when doing so to protect strategic assets or sectorial or national critical infrastructure, additional criteria must be included regarding sensitivity, domain of application, audience, dependencies and capacity for resilience. From this point of view, the risk assessment currently carried out in the Colombian port sector is limited to the scope established by the ISPS code and is insufficient to design sectorial protection plans. Risk assessments at this level should consider factors such as dependencies, interdependencies and resilience capacity of the sector in order to serve as a basis for protection plans at the sectoral and national levels. | eng |
| dc.title.translated | Importance of risk assessment at the sectoral level, an approximation beyond the ISPS code | spa |
| dc.subject.keywords | Risk Management | spa |
| dc.subject.keywords | Risk Assessment | spa |
| dc.subject.keywords | Port Sector | spa |
| dc.subject.keywords | ISPS Code | spa |
| dc.subject.keywords | Critical Infrastructure | spa |
| dc.publisher.program | Especialización en Administración de Seguridad | spa |
| dc.creator.degreename | Especialista en Administración de Seguridad | spa |
| dc.description.degreelevel | Especialización | spa |
| dc.publisher.faculty | Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad - Especialización en Administración de la Seguridad | spa |
| dc.type.dcmi-type-vocabulary | Text | spa |
| dc.type.version | info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion | spa |
| dc.rights.creativecommons | Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas | spa |
| dc.relation.references | AENOR. (2011). Norma UNE-EN 31010 (la cual adapta la norma ISO/IEC 31010:2009). Madrid: Secretaria AENOR | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Allen, G., & Derr, R. (2015). Threat assessment and risk analysis, an applied approach. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann | spa |
| dc.relation.references | ASME-ITI. (2005). RAMCAP™ Executive Summary. Recuperado el 8 de mayo de 2017, de http://files.asme.org/ASMEITI/RAMCAP/12604.pdf | spa |
| dc.relation.references | ASME-ITI. (2009). All-Hazards Risk and Resilience, Prioritizing Critical Infrastructures using the RAMCAP Plus Approach. Recuperado el 9 de mayo de 2018, de http://files.asme.org/ASMEITI/RAMCAP/17978.pdf | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Biringer, B. (2000). A Risk Assessment Methodology for Physical Security. Albuquerque: Sandia National Laboratories. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Broder, J., & Tucker, E. (2011). Risk Analysis and the Security Survey. Boston: Butterworth Heinemann. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Secuerity, a new framework for analysis. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Christopher, K. (2015). Port Security Management (2a ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Comando General de las Fuerzas Militares. (2015). Guía para la identficación de infraestructura crítica cibernética (ICC) de Colombia. Bogotá: Comando Conjunto Cibernético. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Comando General de las Fuerzas Militares. (2016). Catálogo Infraestructura Crítica Cibernética de Colombia . Bogotá: Comando Conjunto Cibernético. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Comisión Colombiana del Océano. (2017). Política Nacional del Océano y de los Espacios Costeros. Bogotá: XXXX. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Control Risk. (6 de Febrero de 2018). Maritime Risk 2017 in review. Recuperado el 23 de Abril de 2018, de https://www.controlrisks.com/our-thinking/insights/reports/maritime-risk-2017-in-review | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Dimar. (2018). Protección Maritima en Colombia. Bogotá: s.e. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | DLE. (2018). Diccionario de la Lengua Española. Recuperado el 28 de 05 de 2018, de http://dle.rae.es/?id=LmYM333 | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Escuela Superior de Guerra. (2017). Seguridad marítima, retos y amenazas. Bogotá: Ediciones Escuela Superior de Guerra | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Garcia, M. (2006). Vulnerability assessment of physical protection systems. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Garcia, M. L. (2008). The design and evaluation of physicial protection systems. Burlington: Butterworth Heinemann | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Giannopoulos, G., Filippini, R., & Schimmer, M. (2012). Risk assessment methodologies for Critical Infrastructure Protection. Part I: A state of the art. European Commision. Luxembourg: Publictions Office of the European Union. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | International Maritime Organization & International Labour Organization. (2003). Code of practice on security in ports, Document MESSHP/2003/14. Ginebra: IMO Publications. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | International Maritime Organization. (2003). ISPS Code, International Ship & Port Facility Security Code. Londres: IMO Publications | spa |
| dc.relation.references | International Marítime Organization. (2016). Introduction to IMO. Recuperado el 24 de Abril de 2018, de http://www.imo.org/en/about/pages/default.aspx | spa |
| dc.relation.references | International Standard Organization. (2009). Guia ISO IEC 73:2009 (Vocabulario Norma ISO/IEC 31000:2009). Ginebra: Secretaria Central de ISO. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | International Standard Organization. (2018). ISO 31000 Gestión de Riegos. Ginebra: Secretaria Central de ISO | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Jaeger, C., Roehrig, N., & Torres, T. (2008). Development of an Automated Security Risk Assessment Methodology tool for CI. Alburquerque: Sandia National Laboratories | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Karatas, C. (2012). Ports and logistics chains: changes in organizational effectiveness. En D.-w. Song, & P. Panyides, Maritime logistics (págs. 233-269). Londres: Kagan Page Limite | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Landoll, D. (2005). The security risk assessment book. Boca Raton: Auerbach Publications. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Marí, R., de Larrucea, J., & Librán, A. (2005). La seguridasd en los puertos. Barcelona: Marge Books. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Ministerio de Transporte. (2018). Tráfico Portuario en Colombia Año 2017. Bogotá: Superintendencia de Puertos y Transporte | spa |
| dc.relation.references | OECD. (2008). Protection of 'Critical Infrastructure' and the role of investment policies relationg to national security. Paris: OECD, Investment Division | spa |
| dc.relation.references | One Earth Future Foundation. (2013). The Economic Cost of Somali Piracy 2012. Broomfield: Oceans Beyond Piracy | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Peltier, T. (2005). Information Security Risk Analysis. New York: Auerbach Publications. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Procolombia. (2016). Infraestructura logística y transporte de carga en Colombia. Bogotá: s/e | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Rand Corporation. (2014). Vulnerability Assessment Method. Recuperado el 07 de 05 de 2018, de https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/tools/TL100/TL129/RAND_TL129.pdf | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Rinaldi, S., Peerenboom, J., & Kelly, T. (2002). Identifying, Understanding, and Analyzing Criticial Infrastructure Intedependencies. IEEE Control Systems, 21, 11-25. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Roper, C. (1999). Risk Management for Security Professionals. Boston: Butterworth Heinemann. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | The Council of the European Union. (2008). Council Directive 2008/114/EC, on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures. Brussels: EU Publications Office. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | The White House. (2003). HSPD-7, Homeland Security Presidential Directive, Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection. Washington: Office of the Press Secretary. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | The White House. (2013). PPD-21, Presidential Policy Directive, Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience. Washington: Office of the Press Secretary | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Theocharidou, M., & Giannopoulos, G. (2015). Risk assessment methodologies for critical infrastructure protection. Part II: A new approach. Ispra: European Commission, Joint Research Centre. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | U.S. Congress. (2001). H.R. 3162 - USA Patriot Act. Recuperado el 2 de mayo de 2018, de https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr3162enr/pdf/BILLS-107hr3162enr.pdf | spa |
| dc.relation.references | U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2011). The strategic national risk assessment in support of PPD 8. Recuperado el 04 de mayo de 2018, de https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/rma-strategic-national-risk-assessment-ppd8.pdf. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2013a). NIPP 2013, Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience. Washington: s/e. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2013b). Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide. Washington: s/e. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2014). Maritime Piracy, Part I. Ginebra: Naciones Unidas. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2017). Review of Maritime Transport 2017. Geneva: United Nations Publications. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Vellani, K. (2007). Strategic Security Management, a risk assessment guide for decision makers. Oxford: Marge Books. | spa |
| dc.relation.references | White, J. (2014). Secuity Risk Assessment. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Yerca, F., & Yildiz, T. (2012). International maritime trade and logistics. En D.-w. Song, & P. Panayides, Maritime Logistics (págs. 23-44). Londres: Kogan Page Limited | spa |
| dc.relation.references | Young, C. (2010). Metrics and methods for security risk management. Burlington: Syngress | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Gestión de Riesgo | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Valoración de Riesgo | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Sector Portuario | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Código PBIP | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Infraestructura Crítica | spa |
Archivos en el ítem
Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Derechos Reservados - Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, 2018