Views of Risk in Sweden: Global Fatalism and Local Control — An Empirical Investigation of Ulrich Beck's Theory of New Risks

Ulrich Beck's theory of risk society has been criticised because there is lack of empirical evidence. By comparing people with different life contexts and experiences, the aim of this study was to investigate how these people view risk, and if ‘new’ risks are perceived differently by different groups in society. Five focus‐group interviews were conducted in Sweden, in 2004/05, with people in rural and urban areas, people with a foreign background and experts. The groups consisted of four people each and lasted for two hours. The results show that ‘new’ risks are not something people worry about; ‘risk’ is associated with personal experiences and life context. This indicates a traditional or at least modern way of viewing risk, and contradicts the idea of a reflexive view of risk. However, a division between the urban versus the rural‐migrant groups appears: the expert‐urban groups show a more global—fatalistic strategy to handle of risk, while the rural—migrant group shows a more traditional approach to risk, where control and the local context are in focus.     

Management of rainfall-related environmental risks in urban area

Rainfall brings urban residents both benefits, such as water resources, but also adverse risks such as flooding. Additionally, it has been recognized that wet weather run-off discharges pollutants

and transfers chemicals and pathogen bacteria into the aquatic ecosystem. This causes not only deterioration of water quality but also environmental pollution risk. Both the flood risk and environmental pollution risk are treated here as ‘rainfall-related environmental risks’. Although these two kinds of risks are quite different in their characteristics, the main purpose of urban wet weather flow management is how to decrease these risks. Furthermore, these risks have a similar background which is concerned with both the urban structure and the life-style of urban residents. Recently, flood disaster has occurred in the Japanese urban area with increasing frequency causing damage due not only to rainfall intensity, but also the vulnerability of urban structures against heavy storms. Although there has been urban area expansion and a decline in substrate permeability, wet weather flow management in Japan is aimed simply to drain the increased run-off volume quickly. As for the management of hazardous chemicals which might be discharged together with rainfall run-off, this has not been implemented sufficiently. It is necessary to develop a methodology to reduce rainfall-related environmental risks in urban wet weather flow management. In this paper, the possible risk management process and control options of rainfall-related risks will be discussed after a summary of both the similar and differing points between inundation risk and environmental pollution risk. As a result, it is deemed necessary to operate a scheme to raise the rainfall-related environmental risk perception level of urban residents to ensure their participation in risk management.     

What role for social scientists in risk expertise?

When it comes to risks – health and environmental risks, like those linked to the use of nanotechnologies, pesticides, etc. – three main groups of actors are easily identified, brought together through boundary organisations such as environmental and sanitary risk agencies: the natural and technical scientists, who provide their expertise to assess risks (especially toxicologists, epidemiologists and microbiologists); the policy makers, who take decisions regarding risk management and risk regulation; the lay public, who are more and more involved in participatory frameworks. Sometimes three other groups of actors are added: the ‘economists’ who can for instance conduct cost–benefit assessments or multi-criteria analyses (especially ecological economists, public economists, political economists and social economists); the ‘philosophers’/‘ethicists’ who can use ethics to highlight moral choices and responsibilities in face of risks; and the ‘jurists’/‘legal experts’ who can justify authorisation or interdiction according to law. Inversely, there is a group of actors which is not clearly identified, that of social scientists, even though a considerable quantity of social science knowledge on risk has been produced. Why is there such a discrepancy? This article, based on a critical review of the literature, aims to make sense of the fuzziness surrounding the involvement of social scientists when it comes to risk expertise. The article shows that one reason for this puzzling situation is to be found in the gap between what social scientists often want to do when they are called in as risk experts and what natural scientists and public policy makers actually expect from them.     

Locally Greater Vulnerability to Background Risk

Willingness to take on risk is influenced by the presence of fair and unfair background risks for decision makers who are risk vulnerable as defined by Gollier and Pratt [1996], for these decision makers are more risk averse when they possess such an uninsurable background risk. We present an alternative derivation of the index of local vulnerability based on Diamond and Stiglitz [1974] compensated increases in risk, such that risk aversion increases with the introduction of any small fair background risk if and only if the index of local vulnerability is positive. We establish that the increase in risk aversion is greater for those who are more vulnerable as measured by the index of local vulnerability.     

The ‘Plateau‐ing’ of the European Better Regulation Agenda: An Analysis of Activities Carried out by the Barroso Commission

In this paper we examine cases commonly characterised as risk‐risk tradeoffs (i.e., creating new risks while solving existing ones), in an attempt to learn lessons that can be valuable for future regulatory decision‐making. A broad range of environmental and health literature was reviewed and numerous cases of proclaimed risk‐risk tradeoffs were analysed in order to determine: 1) why regulatory measures were initially taken, 2) why these measures caused a countervailing risk to emerge, 3) how tradeoffs could have been avoided, and 4) whether the case is a good example of a risk‐risk tradeoff. The analysis reveals that only a small number of these cases can actually be considered risk‐risk tradeoffs. In a large number of cases safer alternatives are and were available at the time decisions were made. In some cases the proclaimed risk‐risk tradeoff simply did not exist or occur, and in some cases countervailing risks were ignored for reasons unknown. In many cases, the countervailing risks could have been anticipated and avoided by proactively seeking safer alternatives, completing a tradeoff and impact assessment, or increasing stakeholder input in the decision‐making process. We conclude that concerns about risk‐risk tradeoffs are not a reasonable argument against future application of the precautionary principle. Indeed, sound decision‐making processes in the face of uncertainty should always consider and attempt to mitigate reasonable risk‐risk tradeoffs.     

Risk as perceived by the German public: pervasive risks and “switching” risks

In 2001, a major project on the perception and evaluation of risks in southern Germany was conducted consisting of survey data as well as of semi‐structured interviews. With reference to the psychometric paradigm, this article analyzes public risk perception, pointing out the perceived risk semantic for nuclear energy, GM‐food, mad cow disease (BSE), crime, global climate change, mobile telephony and its radiation risks. These hazards reveal different patterns of risk perception and different levels of risk acceptability. Secondly, a comparison of qualitative and quantitative findings will be conducted: qualitative analyses indicate that the results of quantitative rating scales on the perception, evaluation and acceptance of technical and environmental hazards might be misleading since the public's focus on risks as elicited by open association stimuli relies much more on ‘everyday‐life’ and ‘pervasive’ risks than for instance on hazards emerging from new technologies. The relevance of technological risks tends to be dependent on the context: If explicitly mentioned in newscasts, in debates or listed in questionnaires memories, fears or other immediate responses become activated, yet they may be forgotten a short time later. We have called this phenomenon “switching effect” and the respective risks “switching risks”. In standardized opinion polls such ‘switching effects’ may evoke firm judgments, even if the importance in the interviewee's mental representation seems marginal.     

Travelling risks: How did nanotechnology become a risk in India and South Africa?

India and South Africa have invested in nanotechnology since the early 2000s and have identified risks to human health and the environment as an important issue for governance. This is exemplary for a wider trend in which ‘developing countries’ play an increasingly prominent role in the development, production and use of emerging technologies. This validates the claim of the world risk society thesis that countries around the world are now confronted with the risks of emerging technologies. Little is known, however, about the way developing countries deal with the potential risks of emerging technologies. Starting from the observation that the risk colonization of nanotechnology in developing countries cannot be taken for granted, this article draws upon the relational theory of risk in order to investigate how nanotechnology became understood as an object of risk in South Africa and India. The article shows that nanotechnology was constituted as an object of risk in rather different ways in India and South Africa, demonstrating that the spread of risk discourses – and the emergence of a world risk society – cannot be understood without attending to the local context. The article shows that way risk is understood and dealt with changes as risk discourses travel around the world, giving many different faces to the world risk society.     

关系型交易对审计费用的影响——基于经营风险理论视角

关系型交易模式可能会在议价能力、关系专用性投资成本转换等方面加剧上市公司的经营风险,进而影响审计费用。已有研究主要集中于关系型交易对审计行为的影响,鲜有文献关注其中的作用机制。本文基于经营风险理论视角,选取2008~2017年沪深A股制造业上市公司的相关数据,实证分析了关系型交易对审计费用的影响,结果表明:关系型交易显著加剧了企业经营风险的集聚,进而提升审计费用,即经营风险在关系型交易对审计费用的影响中起到了中介作用。进一步研究,在区分了产权性质以及耐用品特征后,实证结果显示关系型交易与审计费用的正相关关系在非国有企业以及耐用品行业的企业中较为显著,为审计师进行合理审计定价提供了经验证据支持。     

Sham or shame: Rethinking the China's milk powder scandal from a legal perspective

The Sanlu milk powder scandal finally evolved into a nationwide dairy‐industry crisis in China. This paper attempts to rethink this scandal from a legal perspective and the issue of systemic risk. The case is studied from five different perspectives, namely, China's legislation, regulatory system, supervisory system, approaches to systemic risk, and corporate social responsibility awareness. Finally, some policy implications are also considered, which form the basis of recommendations to decision‐makers.     

A Collaborative Multi‐criteria Decision Making Technique for Risk Factor Prioritization

Organizations are a collection of individuals, and often a disastrous organizational accident involves contributions from several technical/environmental factors and actors throughout the system over time. This paper illustrates the efficiency of a new collaborative decision making technique that could assist a group of executive decision makers in identifying, analyzing, evaluating and prioritizing significant organizational system risks. The results from the collaborative technique when applied to real world risk intensive situations, such as aviation safety risk management, are compared with those obtained by using existing notable techniques. For the case examples shown, the number of expert judgments is reduced by up to 80%. Advantages and limitations of the proposed modeling approach for collaborative decision making are discussed.     

Understanding expressed low concern and latent concern near a hazardous waste treatment facility

This paper discusses local small town residents’ concerns about risk and safety near a hazardous waste facility at Swan Hills, Alberta, Canada. The majority of the residents studied outwardly express that they have low concern about the facility. The purposes are to both elaborate existing theory that potentially explains low concern and to explore new explanations of low concern in everyday life. Theories or concepts which potentially explain expressed low concern are start-points for this qualitative case study. These include: economic risk theory, psychometric risk theory, cultural risk theory, cognitive dissonance (threat denial), community identity and stigma, and risk attenuation. Thirtyeight in-depth resident interviews involving views of facility risks, as well as community life, are used to better understand the social construction of risk. It is found that despite the fact that 31 residents outwardly insist they have no or low concern about facility risks when first prompted, 11 actually do show latent concerns when probed further, expressed as uncertainty, reservations and doubt. It is argued that juxtaposing the views of insiders against those perceived to be held by outsiders furthers understanding of why facility concern is rarely expressed in such a community. There is a heightened sense of pride and positive community identity manifest as a defensive reaction by insider residents to outsiders who are perceived to hold negative, stigmatizing views of the facility as well as the town. Implications relating to community and industry vigilance as well as the impacts of outsiders sensationalising risk are discussed.     

Evaluation of psychosocial and organizational factors in offshore safety: a comparative study

This study compares UK and Norwegian offshore workers' evaluations of social and organizational factors that can have an impact upon safety on offshore installations. A total of 1138 Norwegian (87% response rate) and 622 UK workers (40% response rate) responded to a self-completion questionnaire, which was distributed to 18 installations in February/March 1994. The questionnaire contained six scales that were suitable and relevant for the purposes of comparison. These scales measured ‘risk perception’, ‘satisfaction with safety measures’, ‘perceptions of the job situation’, ‘attitudes to safety’, ‘perceptions of others' commitment to safety’ and ‘perceptions of social support’. The data show clear differences in how UK and Norwegian workers evaluate various social and organizational factors that can have an impact upon safety, however, eta² analysis indicated that for most of the scales ‘installation’ explained a greater percentage of the variance than sector. The exceptions to this were scales measuring ‘safety attitudes’ where both sector and installation contributed equally to the effects. Although the results from the ‘safety attitudes’ scales should be interpreted with caution (due to low internal reliability), it is possible that they are tapping into more deeply held beliefs about the nature of safety, e.g. ‘fatalism’ and the ‘causes of accidents’. In contrast, the other scales are measuring factors directly related to the working environment such as perceptions of risk and satisfaction with safety measures on the installation. These may reflect the prevailing ‘safety climate’ or ‘atmosphere’ on the installations surveyed, whereas constructs such as ‘fatalism’, etc. may be reflections of underlying ‘cultural’ values. Recognizing the existence of different ‘safety cultures’ and understanding the processes which lie behind them could have implications for safety management in an industry which is highly international in nature and in which workers' are often required to work in foreign countries for varying periods of time.     

Engineered nanomaterials: risk perception,regulation and insurance

Concerns surrounding the health risk of engineered nanomaterials, effective regulation and the lack of specifically tailored insurance products for the nanotechnology sector are putting the industry’s long-term economic viability at risk. From the perspective of the underwriter, this article speculates on the relationship between risk perception, regulation and insurability. In the nanotechnology sector, regulators are currently failing to keep pace with innovation, and insurers generally lack guiding principles for underwriting occupational risk from nanomaterial exposure. Such vulnerabilities when combined with misguided risk perceptions can lead to the overpricing of risk transfer and ill-conceived regulatory initiatives, thus potentially exhausting resources and stifling innovation in the sector. In the absence of well-developed regulatory protocols, the insurance industry has, and will continue, to occupy a key role as an effective lobby in terms of improved risk management practice. We suggest that the insurance industry will increasingly rely on control banding frameworks and ‘risk mitigation at source’ methods developed in conjunction with their clients to manage severe acute diversifiable risks. Long tail risk will continue to represent a serious challenge to insurers and regulators. In the meantime, insurers will have to bridge their current needs with improvised solutions. As an example of one possible solution, we outline a framework that utilizes financial instruments to hedge an insurer’s exposure to uncertain estimates of these long-term risks.     

Risk,responsibility and negative responses: a qualitative study of parental trust in childhood vaccinations

Abstract

Childhood vaccination programmes have benefits that far outweigh risks, in public health terms. However, some parents decide not to immunise their children. This paper explores the ways in which such parents talk about the perceived risks and benefits incurred by vaccinating (or not vaccinating) their children. Between 2013 and 2016, we undertook 29 in-depth interviews with non-vaccinating and/or ‘vaccine hesitant’ parents in Fremantle, Western Australia and Adelaide, South Australia. Our analysis of the interviews identified particular constructions of risk and responsibility. All interviews were transcribed and analysed using both inductive and deductive processes. Our analysis mirrors the chronological process through which parents navigate risk. We start with the concept of ‘responsibilisation’, which underpins parental engagement with decision-making and praxis. We then explore how responsiblisation takes the form of detailed and time-consuming ‘research’. Parents then attempt to navigate multiple and conflicting ‘risks’: the risk of vaccine-preventable diseases, risks associated with vaccination and risks associated with their own perceived lack of understanding. After engaging with risk, parents justify the decision and accept the associated ‘responsibility’. Parents use this sense of responsibility to navigate through the ‘responses’ of others, which we conceptualise as the risk of unwelcome consequences. In conclusion, parents have a reflexive understanding of the physical, psychological and socio-economic risks they incur as a consequence of their choice to either partially vaccinate, delay vaccination or reject vaccination for their children. They construct these risks with reference to particular discourses, engagement with expert opinion and lifestyle choices emblematic of late modernity. The risks they are willing to accept and the subsequent responsibility and blame they assume when choosing to abstain, or partially abstain, from vaccinating their children are, to the parents, coherent with their interpretation of best parenting practice.     

Supporting ALARP decision making by cost benefit analysis and multiattribute utility theory

Current guidance in the UK and elsewhere indicate upper and target risk limits for the operation of nuclear plant in terms of individual risk per annum. ‘As low as reasonably practicable’ (ALARP) arguments are used to justify the acceptance or rejection of policies that lead to risk changes between these limits. The suitability of cost‐benefit analysis (CBA) and multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) are assessed for performing ALARP (‘as low as reasonably possible’) assessments, in particular within the nuclear industry. Four problems stand out in current CBA applications to ALARP, concerning the determination of prices of safety gains or detriments, the valuation of group and individual risk, calculations using ‘disproportionality’, and the use of discounting to trade‐off risks through time. This last point has received less attention in the past but is important because of the growing interest in risk‐informed regulation in which policies extend over several timeframes and distribute the risk unevenly over these, or in policies that lead to a nonuniform risk within a single timeframe (such as maintenance policies). The problems associated with giving quantitative support to such decisions are discussed. It is argued that multiattribute utility methods (MAUT) provide an alternative methodology to CBA which enable the four problems described above to be addressed in a more satisfactory way. Through sensitivity analysis MAUT can address the perceptions of all stakeholder groups, facilitating constructive discussion and elucidating the key points of disagreement. It is also argued that by being explicitly subjective it provides an open, auditable and clear analysis in contrast to the illusory objectivity of CBA. CBA seeks to justify a decision by using a common basis for weights (prices), while MAUT recognizes that different parties may want to give different valuations. It then allows the analyst to explore the ways in which different parties might (or might not) come to the same conclusion even when weighting items differently.     

Reasoning about safety management policy in everyday terms: a pilot study in citizen engagement for the UK railway industry

This paper reports on a pilot study in citizen engagement which formed part of a broader stakeholder engagement and consultation programme addressing safety decision‐making for UK rail industry activities. In addition to developing tools to support engagement initiatives, the study was concerned specifically with investigating everyday lay notions of what is a ‘reasonable’ basis for establishing safety. In view of the technical complexity of this issue, the exercise therefore presented an important methodological challenge: how to ‘translate’ specialised economic and legal issues in such a way that lay citizens were able to grasp, and reason about, these issues in an informed and considered way. The engagement exercise worked well in terms of its capacity to promote such a process of informed consideration, and in being ‘user friendly’ for participants. Despite the exercise involving a relatively small number of discussion group meetings, the quality and depth of the evidence collected allows some cautious provisional conclusions to be drawn regarding lay sensibilities concerning certain technical aspects of rail safety management.     

Risk governance in an age of wicked problems: lessons from the European approach to indirect land-use change

In this article, the success of a risk communication programme conducted in two municipalities in Sweden is evaluated. The communication efforts were initiated in order to comply with the Seveso II Directive, passed as a national law in July 1999. Data from two different questionnaires are used. Between the distribution of the two questionnaires, an information campaign took place in the communities. The first questionnaire was aimed at measuring the public's opinion and understanding of the risks related to chemical industries in their communities, as well as the public's knowledge of emergency behaviour in the event of an accident. The second was aimed at measuring the effects or impact of the risk communication programme on the public. A total of 346 respondents participated in the study by answering two questionnaires. An evaluation of the risk communication efforts was focused around three dimensions: comprehension, audience evaluation and communication failures. The results showed differences between the two campaigns that gave significantly different results in the two communities. In the community with the multimedia channel campaign, the respondents showed greater knowledge of the production process at the local industry, they also judged the health threats for that industry to be less after the campaign, and they saved the information material to a greater extent. However, the overall effects of the information campaigns were weak. Future research is needed to explore the relation between people's emergency behaviour and risk communication.     

Communication of risk assessment information to risk managers

This article describes the results of a two-phase study of risk communication between risk assessors and risk managers (including policy makers). The first phase consisted of telephone interviews with 30 air quality risk managers from all levels (18 from local, state, and regional offices, and 12 from national offices). The second phase involved a focus group with 11 senior EPA risk managers representing a broad range of EPA national offices and programmes. The two-hour focus group elicited responses from the risk managers to specific examples of videotaped risk information created by agency risk assessors. The risk managers indicated their interests in hearing both qualitative and quantitative information about risk and emphasized the importance of discussing other information about the decision context. Similar responses to the videotaped risk information were elicited from a class of students at the Harvard School of Public Health. This exploratory work suggests that to better inform risk managers, risk assessors must also appreciate and present the broader context of the decision, and they must convey how uncertainties and weaknesses in the assessment may influence stakeholder perceptions of risk and the effectiveness of different risk management options. Further research on how to communicate risk information to risk managers is recommended.     

How do policymakers and think tank stakeholders prioritize the risks of the nuclear fuel cycle? A semantic network analysis

In recent years, the importance of stakeholder involvement and of integrating diverse perspectives into risk management has gained increasing recognition. However, it remains a challenging task to identify all potentially relevant stakeholders and to reliably describe their deeply held beliefs regarding the risks associated with complex industrial systems. For example, the development of advanced nuclear fuel cycles presents such a case. Based on a review of policy-making literatures and a content analysis of congressional records, we identify federal agencies and nonprofit policy institutes (also known as ‘think tanks’) as key stakeholders that are representative of those actively involved in making high-level decisions on the US nuclear energy policy. Using a semantic network analysis approach, we visually delineate the thematic areas of each party’s perceptions concerning fuel cycle risks. The results show that although governmental and think tank stakeholders share common concerns in areas such as nuclear waste management, the economics of nuclear facilities, and proliferation, they tend to focus on distinct aspects of each area. Moreover, while governmental stakeholders are primarily concerned with the environmental and local impacts of nuclear fuel cycles, think tank stakeholders focus more on the relative advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy compared to other alternative energy options. Implications for risk management and risk communication are discussed.