Abstract:Risk management has become increasingly politicized and contentious. Polarized views, controversy, and conflict have become pervasive. Research has begun to provide a new perspective on this problem by demonstrating the complexity of the concept "risk" and the inadequacies of the traditional view of risk assessment as a purely scientific enterprise. This paper argues that danger is real, but risk is socially constructed. Risk assessment is inherently subjective and represents a blending of science and judgment with important psychological, social, cultural, and political factors. In addition, our social and democratic institutions, remarkable as they are in many respects, breed distrust in the risk arena. Whoever controls the definition of risk controls the rational solution to the problem at hand. If risk is defined one way, then one option will rise to the top as the most cost-effective or the safest or the best. If it is defined another way, perhaps incorporating qualitative characteristics and other contextual factors, one will likely get a different ordering of action solutions. Defining risk is thus an exercise in power. Scientific literacy and public education are important, but they are not central to risk controversies. The public is not irrational. Their judgments about risk are influenced by emotion and affect in a way that is both simple and sophisticated. The same holds true for scientists. Public views are also influenced by worldviews, ideologies, and values; so are scientists' views, particularly when they are working at the limits of their expertise. The limitations of risk science, the importance and difficulty of maintaining trust, and the complex, sociopolitical nature of risk point to the need for a new approach--one that focuses upon introducing more public participation into both risk assessment and risk decision making in order to make the decision process more democratic, improve the relevance and quality of technical analysis, and increase the legitimacy and public acceptance of the resulting decisions.

Public understanding of risk and risk governance

The role of risk perception for risk management

A literature review on the relationship between risk governance and public engagement in relation to complex environmental issues

Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield

Understanding the implications of low knowledge and high uncertainty in risk studies

Risk Management and Governance

Risk Society and Science Education

Risk Perception: Experts and the Public

Mapping the Knowledge Development and Frontier Areas of Public Risk Governance Research

Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies

Global Catastrophic Risk and the Drivers of Scientist Attitudes Towards Policy

Risk literacy: Foundational issues and its connection to risk science

The Risk Society Revisited: Social Theory and Risk Governance

The Diminishing Publicity of Public Policy:Risk Analysis and Governance

The Communality of Risk: Differentiating the Logic of Risk Governance Based on Evolutionary Game Theory

Rationales of risk and uncertainty and their epistemological foundation by new phenomenology

Four Decades of Public Participation in Risk Decision Making

Knowledge is power – conceptualizing collaborative financial risk assessment

The Implications of Technical Language in Defining, Assessing, and Managing Risk

Risk and Risk Management in the Public Sector : A Theoretical Contribution

Democratising Risk: In Search of a Methodology to Study Existential Risk