Differing perceptions of risk

One of the problems with risk is that people may have quite different views on the nature and extent of a risk that a particular hazard presents. To illustrate this problem we will take flood as a hazard. In the following article by Green et al ., the perception of the risk of flooding of four different groups of people is discussed. As you will see, each group sees the problem in a different way-in effect, they unconsciously choose (from a number of options) how to define the problem. Given the different views of a problem, the 'solutions' people favour are most likely to differ.

You may find the article a rather difficult read because of its 'formal' nature. I suggest you firstly read it through fairly quickly to get a feel for the general 'flavour', skipping over sections that are causing you difficulty and concentrating on following the introduction and conclusion. Then review your understanding and re-read the article, concentrating on those sections with which you had initial problems.

 


Activity 4.2

learning portfolio activityRead

Reading 4.1: The risks from flooding: Which risks and whose perception?

Why is it important to take other peoples' perception into account when developing hazard analyses? From the reading you would gather that we need to do this because peoples ' perceptions and attitudes will strongly influence their actions.

Now think about how the attitudes of the groups of people in the article may affect their actions, and record your thoughts in Table 4.2.


Table 4.2: Different attitudes, different actions

 


Some aspects of
their attitudes
towards flood
How their attitude may affect their actions

 

Engineers

 

 

 

 

 

Emergency Planners

 

 

 

 

 

Public at risk of flooding

 

 

 

 

 

Researchers

 

 

 

 

 

Print this activity

 

Given that there are different perceptions of risk, who is right? Is there in fact a right and a wrong perception? The answer that you make to these questions will depend upon your own attitudes and background, but my opinion is that there is no right or wrong perception, but that some actions taken against hazards are superior to others.

Some may suggest that the opinions of experts in a given field must be the correct opinions, but don't forget their opinions are based on their own individual perceptions. Don't forget that experts such as engineers and researchers are not always exposed to the risks they are studying, whereas certain members of the general public are exposed to these risks.

Here are some of the reasons for differences in the perception of risk between engineers (and other technical people) and the general public.


Table 4.3: Factors relevant to the technical and cultural attitudes to risk

 
Technical Attitude Cultural Attitude
  • Trust in scientific methods, explanations and evidence
  • Trust in political culture and democratic process
  • Appeal to authority and expertise
  • Appeal to folk wisdom, peer groups and traditions
  • Boundaries of analysis are narrow and reductionist
  • Boundaries of analysis are broad; includes use of analogy and historical precedent
  • Risks are depersonalized
  • Risks are personalised
  • Emphasis on statistical variation and probability
  • Emphasis on the impacts of risk on the family and community
  • Appeal to consistency and universality
  • Focus on particularity; less concerned about consistency of approach
  • Where there is controversy in science, resolution follows status
  • Popular responses to scientific differences do not follow the prestige principle
  • Those impacts that cannot be specific are irrelevant
  • Unanticipated or unarticulated risks are relevant

 

Adapted from Krimsky, S. and Plough, A. (1987). The emergence of risk communication studies: Social and political context, Science, Technology and Human Values, 12 (3&4), 7.

 

 

about this CD | site-map | © Charles Sturt University