IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v15y1995i6p677-684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives on Risk Management

Author

Listed:
  • Emmanuel Somers

Abstract

The development of the techniques of risk assessment and management are considered, noting the early emphasis on quantitative approaches. The basic strategies available to governments for risk management—educational, economic, and regulatory—are discussed. Six specific issues are considered with reference to the Canadian experience and the lessons learned. These are: the separation of risk assessment from risk management; the uncertainties of science; the weakness of numerical comparisons; too great a trust in education; the Great White Father Syndrome; and regulatory perils. This examination shows a number of inadequacies in the application of risk management techniques. It is suggested that knowledge of the limitations of quantitative assessment in its application to decision‐making together with the involvement of those affected by the risk in the decision‐making processes will lead to greater success.

Suggested Citation

  • Emmanuel Somers, 1995. "Perspectives on Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(6), pages 677-684, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:15:y:1995:i:6:p:677-684
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb01339.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb01339.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb01339.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lois Swirsky Gold & Neela B. Manley & Bruce N. Ames, 1992. "Extrapolation of Carcinogenicity Between Species: Qualitative and Quantitative Factors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 579-588, December.
    2. Sheila Jasanoff, 1993. "Bridging the Two Cultures of Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 123-129, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Raffaele Zanoli & Danilo Gambelli & Francesco Solfanelli, 2014. "Assessing Risk Factors in the Organic Control System: Evidence from Inspection Data in Italy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(12), pages 2174-2187, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elisa Morgera, 2015. "Fair and Equitable Benefit-Sharing at the Cross-Roads of the Human Right to Science and International Biodiversity Law," Laws, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-29, December.
    2. Cope, S. & Frewer, L.J. & Houghton, J. & Rowe, G. & Fischer, A.R.H. & de Jonge, J., 2010. "Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 349-357, August.
    3. Andree Ehlert & Jan Seidel & Ursula Weisenfeld, 2020. "Trouble on my mind: the effect of catastrophic events on people’s worries," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 951-975, August.
    4. Arnold Tukker, 2002. "Risk Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment—The Common Challenge of Dealing with the Precautionary Frame (Based on the Toxicity Controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 821-832, October.
    5. Joanna Burger & Robert A. Kennamer & I. Lehr Brisbin & Michael Gochfeld, 1998. "A Risk Assessment for Consumers of Mourning Doves," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 563-573, October.
    6. Aimee Guglielmo Kinney & Thomas M. Leschine, 2002. "A Procedural Evaluation of an Analytic‐Deliberative Process: The Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 83-100, February.
    7. Bill Durodié, 2003. "The True Cost of Precautionary Chemicals Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 389-398, April.
    8. Robert P. Anex & Will Focht, 2002. "Public Participation in Life Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment: A Shared Need," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 861-877, October.
    9. Aven, Terje & Ylönen, Marja, 2018. "A risk interpretation of sociotechnical safety perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 13-18.
    10. George E. Apostolakis & Susan E. Pickett, 1998. "Deliberation: Integrating Analytical Results into Environmental Decisions Involving Multiple Stakeholders," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 621-634, October.
    11. Peter Neuteboom, 2003. "A European comparison of the costs and risks of mortgages for owner-occupiers," European Journal of Housing Policy, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 155-171.
    12. Kenneth Pettersen Gould, 2021. "Organizational Risk: “Muddling Through” 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 456-465, March.
    13. John Downer & M. V. Ramana, 2021. "Empires built on sand: On the fundamental implausibility of reactor safety assessments and the implications for nuclear regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1304-1325, October.
    14. Charles Vlek, 2018. "Induced Earthquakes from Long‐Term Gas Extraction in Groningen, the Netherlands: Statistical Analysis and Prognosis for Acceptable‐Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1455-1473, July.
    15. Helene Hermansson, 2012. "Defending the Conception of “Objective Risk”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 16-24, January.
    16. Eliana Fischer & Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Annalisa Greco & Francesco Martinico & Alessandro Pluchino & Andrea Rapisarda, 2022. "Objective and Perceived Risk in Seismic Vulnerability Assessment at an Urban Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    17. Catherine E. Althaus, 2005. "A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 567-588, June.
    18. B. Croke & J. Ticehurst & R. Letcher & J. Norton & L. Newham & A. Jakeman, 2007. "Integrated assessment of water resources: Australian experiences," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(1), pages 351-373, January.
    19. Corinne Moser & Michael Stauffacher & Pius Krütli & Roland W. Scholz, 2012. "The Crucial Role of Nomothetic and Idiographic Conceptions of Time: Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Nuclear Waste Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 138-154, January.
    20. Elaine Vaughan, 1995. "The Significance of Socioeconomic and Ethnic Diversity for the Risk Communication Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 169-180, April.

    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:wly:riskan:v:15:y:1995:i:6:p:677-684. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.