hazard-analysis

Hazard-analysis is performed for the sake of risk-assessment. Its designed purpose is to identify and characterize hazards so that risk assessment can evaluate and prioritize them. The servant (hazard-analysis) points at the master (risk-assessment). Law 8d.

Hazard-analysis existed only after the concept of hazard was established. The practice of systematically analyzing hazards derives from the prior concept of what a hazard is. Which-came-first test: hazard (the concept) predates hazard-analysis (the method). Law 7 satisfied.

Hazard-analysis is performed for the sake of corrective-action: by identifying and characterizing hazards and their causal chains, it produces the input that corrective-action needs to determine what interventions are required. SERVES per Law 8d: servant (hazard-analysis) points at master (corrective-action).

hazard-analysis is built and maintained for the sake of reliability-engineering: by systematically identifying and characterizing hazards and their causal chains, it produces the foundational input that reliability-engineering needs to design safeguards, failure-tolerant architectures, and risk-mitigation strategies.

hazard-analysis is built and maintained for the sake of risk-management: identifying and classifying hazards feeds directly into the risk management process. The designed purpose is to serve risk-management's operation by providing its primary input — the hazard register.

fault-tree-analysis IS a specific kind of hazard-analysis: it applies Boolean logic to model how component failures combine to produce system-level hazards. A competent speaker would call a fault-tree analysis 'a kind of hazard analysis.'

bow-tie-analysis is a specific kind of hazard-analysis method. The bow-tie diagram maps hazards, threats, consequences, and controls in a single visual. A competent risk analyst would call it 'a hazard analysis method.' Direction test: hazard-analysis is the general category; bow-tie-analysis is the specific instance. INSTANCE_OF per Law 9.

hazard-and-operability (HAZOP) is a specific methodology of hazard analysis. A competent speaker would call HAZOP 'a hazard-analysis technique.' Law 9: X INSTANCE_OF Y means X is a specific case of general Y. The HAZOP process — using guide-words to identify causes and consequences of deviations — is one particular structured approach within the broader category of hazard analysis.

Hazard-recognition is the foundational cognitive sub-procedure within hazard-analysis: you must first recognize hazards before you can analyze them in terms of severity, probability, and controls. DERIVED_FROM captures the which-came-first dependency — recognition is the prerequisite that analysis builds on.

Hazard-recognition serves hazard-analysis: the recognition phase is the first step of the hazard-analysis process, and the practice of hazard-recognition is maintained for the sake of enabling systematic hazard-analysis. SERVES (Law 8d): for-whose-sake test — the servant (hazard-recognition) points at the master (hazard-analysis).

Hazard identification exists for the sake of hazard-analysis. You identify hazards first so you can analyze them — the identification step serves the analytical step. Per Law 8d: the designed purpose of identifying hazards is to feed the analysis process.