Harte (1988) suggests a three-step approach to environmental problem-solving: • Develop a broad overview of the problem to obtain “the big picture” while

applying appropriate reality checks. • Provide quantitative expressions and data for the developed qualitative

description of the problem in order to provide a defined solution. • Perform sensitivity analysis of the assumptions and data to check the

robustness of the solution. In his book about environmental negotiations, Gorczynski (1992) suggests

several steps through which a manager can organize to prepare: • What are we taking action about and why? • When will we take action and where? • Who is involved and how are they arrayed? Eisenhardt, et al. (1997) suggests six tactics for managing conflict: • work with more, not less, information; • develop multiple alternatives, • share commonly agreed-upon goals; • interject humor into the decision process; • maintain a balanced power structure; and • resolve issues without forcing consensus. Building on the discussion of environmental risk management in Chapter 2 and

interfacing the assessment, management, and communication of risk in Chapter 3, and applying the principles of the authors cited above, we now describe the practice of Risk-Based Analysis (Table 4.1). We believe that this five-step procedure will be readily adaptable to most corporate processes, and can serve as an organizing theme for mapping a strategy for an impaired property. The aim here is provision of a practical technique that begins “with the end in mind,” and using a systems approach to integrate good science and business practice, with good communications to positively effect the environmental risk management process and thereby lead to a more sustainable urban-industrial landscape. To help, we developed Appendix D using a workbook-like framework to provide an outline and checklist of this procedure in tabular/graphical form.