Author
Abstract
Risk research over the last three decades has been focused on the development of methods of and procedures for risk analysis and risk management. As a consequence of this research, risk management agencies have been trying to make risk assessments a routine operation for evaluating different hazards, chemical agents, or technologies. The problem with the worldwide routinization of the risk assessment methodology is, however, that formal analysis may obscure the conceptual foundations and limitations of this method and may induce a false degree of certainty when dealing with potential side-effects of human actions and interventions. One of the main tasks of the risk community should be to emphasize the necessity of integrated risk assessment and the development of innovative risk management strategies that build upon the insights of the natural, technical and social sciences. In order to integrate risk assessment and risk perception, the article analyses the strengths and weaknesses of each approach to risk analysis and highlights the potential contributions that the technical sciences and the social sciences can offer to risk management. Technical assessments provide the best estimate for judging the average probability of an adverse effect linked to an object or activity. Public perception should govern the selection of criteria on which acceptability or tolerability are to be judged. In addition, public input is needed to determine the trade-offs between criteria. Finally, public preferences are needed to design resilient strategies for coping with remaining uncertainties.
Suggested Citation
Ortwin Renn, 1998.
"Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 49-71, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:1:y:1998:i:1:p:49-71
DOI: 10.1080/136698798377321
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:1:y:1998:i:1:p:49-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.