Леопард Фил

### Risk Analysis in Alpinism and Tourism Using an Equation Accounting for Natural and Generated Risks, Concern, and Uncertainty

In the article continuing the topic of risks, we will examine a more complex danger equation. Based on it, we will evaluate common judgments related to sporting and commercial routes. The article is more complex than the previous ones and is intended for an audience that does not find all the answers in guidelines and rules. It continues the ideology of the previous articles but provides a more detailed answer to the question of why we still get into accidents, even though we seem to be doing everything correctly and according to official guidelines. In the previous chapter, we analyzed real examples of event loops - perhaps the most terrifying phenomenon on a route, when a series of unfortunate decisions traps a group in a loop where each subsequent step leads to a depletion of resources, and after a qualitative reduction, the participants perish. In two of the three cases we analyzed, the group's experience significantly exceeded the complexity of the declared route. As harsh as it may sound, these examples divide the audience into two conditional and polar categories. The first category believes that the events of the loops were obvious from the start and that they can avoid similar situations on their routes. The other half, on the other hand, understands that we are not always able to control the situation, especially in large groups. The division I mentioned does not depend on the experience of hiking and climbing, in terms of their quantity and quality. In this article, we will examine in detail why this is the case. However, the material is intended specifically for the second category - those who want to travel safely in conditions of high uncertainty and do not indulge in illusions of control. Simplified Risk Equation

The article discusses pressing safety issues in alpinism and tourism, including instructor certification, avalanche awareness, the culture of accident analysis, and physical training of participants.

1) Certification of guide instructors Essentially, a new axis of reality for active tourism is being set. As of July 2024, this has become a mandatory framework for commercial accompaniment on complex routes; the authority for certification has been given to all-Russian sports federations, there are schedules for 2025–2026, and many regions are living in "hurry to re-certify by 01.10.2026" mode. Why is this topic hot? It changes responsibility, market, tolerances, and gives rise to a new type of generated risk - "paper competence" and "checkmarks instead of skills". 2) Avalanche literacy as a necessary base, not an elective for enthusiasts A sore topic that has worn everyone out. Strangely, in tourism, suddenly, more attention is being paid to this than in mountaineering. In mountaineering, avalanche training is traditionally embedded in the training system (initial training, "Rescue in the Mountains" badges), although the quality of this training can, to put it mildly, vary. In tourism (hiking, skiing, and mountaineering), the situation is more heterogeneous. Now, more attention is being paid to it against the backdrop of a general increase in interest in active recreation and new legislative initiatives. In some circles, this has become a topic of even more discussion due to the wider audience coverage and less initial regulation - unlike mountaineering. Although, I confess, the over-regulation of mountaineering has always caused me bewilderment. Unlike many European countries or the USA, where mountaineering is often seen as a personal matter and the responsibility of the individual (with an emphasis on insurance and private guide schools), Russia maintains a centralized sports approach. Again, suddenly, while we envy them, many European mountaineers sometimes envy us, considering our state's approach more structured and understandable. What a weird thing.

The equation of risks in alpinism is examined, along with the impact of inherent and generated risks, and the role of experience and equipment.

Before we move on to the chapter where we'll examine a more complex risk equation than the classical one, and analyze the role our experience plays in it, let's first clarify the concepts of risk addition and subtraction. Risk addition poses a specific problem that warrants separate consideration. We have inherent risks and generated risks. They can lead to events. From the chapter on risks, we've learned the following: A) Events are inevitable B) Risks always add up The fewer the sum of risks, the lower the impact of the event on us. However, the force of the event may initially exceed our capabilities. Let's start with an example: we're crossing a pass, and a rock falls on our head. It's known that many tourists have crossed passes without ever being hit by a falling rock. Nevertheless, empirical experience shows that if a tourist hikes passes of category 1B...2A and above every year for 15 years in different regions, it's almost certain that they'll be hit by something falling from above at least once. Maybe a carabiner, ice axe, or a partner's boot. Or even crampons. Very rarely - intentionally )) If someone claims it hasn't happened to them, it means they just don't remember the last time it did. For an experienced tourist, selective memory loss is normal. The same empirical experience of hiking in the same region over many years shows that there are years when everything is falling apart, even things that previously seemed reliable and stable.

Analysis of events and event loops in alpinism and sports tourism, including classification by discreteness, consequences, and duration of impact.

In the previous chapters, we examined the combination of processes that can lead to events on a route. We found that risks are at the root of everything. Risks represent a condition that, if it occurs, has the potential to negatively impact a group. Risks are "before the fact." When we work with risks as uncertain conditions, the event has not yet occurred. Our actions and decisions on the route are always accompanied by risks. They either generate them or, conversely, reduce the likelihood of an event by eliminating the conditions for their occurrence. In most cases, an accident is either caused or accompanied by our actions and decisions - risks. However, our actions and decisions can also prevent an accident or reduce its severity. The nuance is that the negativity of a decision or action is only known after the fact - and often the mistake is not acknowledged; good decisions and actions, on the other hand, mostly go unnoticed because the event did not occur. This contradiction affects the further application of experience. Solely positive experience does not provide an understanding of the boundaries within which decisions and actions are most effective. Nevertheless, negative experience without recognition and analysis of mistakes leads to a similar result. In this regard, the described version of negative experience is much more dangerous than solely positive experience. Thus, risks create conditions for events to occur. Risks come from both the team itself - generated risks, and from the environment - inherent risks. An event is a direct negative impact on the group. That is, when a storm tears a tent, an event occurs, resulting from an environmental factor. The death of one of the participants due to hypothermia in a torn tent is another event. A storm here represents an environmental phenomenon; it becomes an event when it transfers the system to a worse state.

Selye's concept of adaptation energy and modern understanding thereof: managing training and recovery to optimize adaptation energy expenditure and enhance training efficiency.

What is "adaptation energy" according to Selye Hans Selye, a smart guy who came up with the concept of stress, introduced the idea of adaptation energy. Its concept looks like the following: it's not calories and not ATP, but a conditional resource of the body that is spent on adaptation to any stress - cold, hunger, training, infections, mental stress; this resource is finite: the more we spend it without recovery, the closer we are to the stage of exhaustion. In the model of adaptation energy, the following stages can be distinguished: Alarm stage - the body mobilizes, but at the same time spends part of the adaptation energy. Stage of resistance - the body has adapted and maintains a new level of load. Stage of exhaustion - the resource is depleted, and the system starts to fall apart (diseases, overtraining, burnout).

Risk analysis in alpinism and tourism depending on the type of group and its goals, considering risk generation factors and event consequences.

In the second part about accidents, we dissect different groups by their route passage characteristics, resources, and ultimately by how they generate risks. In the previous chapter, we found that the generated risks have the greatest impact on the events occurring within a group. However, different groups generate risks differently, even when the same participants in different teams can create risks in completely opposite ways. Since we consider groups as a whole, as a single entity - simply because a group struggles with events as a unified organism - we will examine resources and risk generation primarily in relation to groups. Nevertheless, at certain stages, which we will inevitably explore using the example of ambitious participants and risk-loving participants, we will see that individual risk generation has a significant factor, especially if it involves: a) clients of commercial groups; b) group leaders. Let's first define the division of groups based on the outcome of the route passage. Groups by Route Passage Outcome Regarding the route outcome, regardless of its complexity, groups are divided into: a) those that have completed the route; b) those that have dropped out of the route without an accident; c) those that have dropped out of the route with an accident. We do not consider exceptional cases that confirm the rules. This is a very logical but "childish" division, which, however, is necessary for us to intermediate the connection between groups and risks, both inherent and generated. So, why did the first group complete the route? Because:

The article examines risks in alpinism and tourism, their classification into inherent and generated risks, and suggests methods for mitigating the negative impact of these risks on a group.

Types of Risks and Their Characteristics For each type of human activity, a specific definition of risk can be derived. This definition also depends on the angle from which the risk is studied. In our case, for alpinism and tourism, the risks we will consider represent a condition that, if it occurs, has the potential to negatively impact the group. The difference here from more "classical" schemes is that we do not consider theoretical models but rather rely on practical ones. Thus, we take as an axiom that conditions capable of having a negative impact arise inevitably and on a constant basis. Firstly, many of them we create consciously and purposefully by setting certain frameworks and rules for navigating the route. Secondly, we are not capable of excluding all negative conditions because some of them arise independently of us. Thirdly, we almost never consider risks as conditions that can also have a positive impact on the group, as our research starts from accident rates rather than from accident-free conditions. In simple terms, our risks are "before something happens." When we work with risks as uncertain conditions, the event has not yet occurred. It is potential and will happen only with a certain degree of probability, high or low. Nevertheless, since we are considering the scheme of risks from a practical perspective, the probability itself in a mathematical sense is not of interest to us because it is not important. We suffer equally from an event that occurred with a "probability of 100%" and one with a "probability of 1%," if the impact of these events is the same. So, below we will structurally examine the risks that represent uncertain conditions capable of having a negative impact.