IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v9y2006i6p623-640.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Perception and Demand for Risk Mitigation in Transport: A Comparison of Lay People, Politicians and Experts

Author

Listed:
  • Torbjørn Rundmo
  • Bjørg‐Elin Moen

Abstract

This paper aims at examining risk perception, worry and demand for risk mitigation in transport and to compare judgements made by lay people, politicians and experts. The results are based on three questionnaire surveys carried out during autumn and winter 2004. The first study involved a representative sample of the Norwegian population (n = 1716), the second sample a group of Norwegian politicians (n = 146) and the third a group of experts on transport safety (n = 26). Studies carried out previously (Sjöberg, 1998a, 1999) have given support to the idea that consequences are more important for demands of risk mitigation than probability assessments. In the present study it is hypothesised that this may be because they are associated with worry and it is also proposed that worry relates more strongly to demands for risk mitigation than evaluation of consequences. The results of SEM‐modelling showed that worry was a stronger and more significant predictor of demands for risk mitigation compared to consequences and worry mediated the effect of consequences. Probability assessment was a totally insignificant predictor. In accordance with previous studies, the results showed that experts demanded less risk reduction than lay people and politicians. The results indicate that this is because they stress the probability more than the other two groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Torbjørn Rundmo & Bjørg‐Elin Moen, 2006. "Risk Perception and Demand for Risk Mitigation in Transport: A Comparison of Lay People, Politicians and Experts," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 623-640.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:9:y:2006:i:6:p:623-640
    DOI: 10.1080/13669870600813811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870600813811
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669870600813811?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lennart Sjöberg & Elisabeth Engelberg, 2010. "Risk Perception and Movies: A Study of Availability as a Factor in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 95-106, January.
    2. Khansa Zaman & Sajid Bashir & Zahra Afaq & Naimah Khan, 2022. "Covid-19 Risk Perception of Travel Destination Development and Validation of a Scale," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    3. Torbjørn Rundmo & Trond Nordfjærn, 2019. "Judgement of Transport Security, Risk Sensitivity and Travel Mode Use in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, March.
    4. Şimşekoğlu, Özlem & Nordfjærn, Trond & Rundmo, Torbjørn, 2015. "The role of attitudes, transport priorities, and car use habit for travel mode use and intentions to use public transportation in an urban Norwegian public," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 113-120.
    5. Lennart Sjöberg & Britt-Marie Drottz-Sjöberg, 2008. "Risk Perception by Politicians and the Public," Energy & Environment, , vol. 19(3-4), pages 455-483, July.
    6. Emma Soane & Iljana Schubert & Simon Pollard & Sophie Rocks & Edgar Black, 2016. "Confluence and Contours: Reflexive Management of Environmental Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(6), pages 1090-1107, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:9:y:2006:i:6:p:623-640. 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.