| Paper: |
The
Blueprint of Risks
(Paper
published in Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference
on Environmental Science and Technology - Part 2, August 19-22
2006, Houston, Texas.)
|
| Abstract: |
A new paradigm for risk
analysis is proposed. The paradigm builds on a more holistic
and integrative conceptualisation of the nature of risk than
has hitherto been recognised in risk studies. The starting
point is the idea that risk exists only by virtue of the knowledge
people have of it: scientific knowledge (broadly, risk estimation
based on probability and consequence) and social knowledge
(broadly, risk perception based on gut feelings, cultural
and social values, and organisational norms, etc.). The research
aim is to investigate the fundamental nature of risk. Do risk
issues (e.g. environmental radiation such as Technetium in
tidal estuaries, hazardous weather conditions such as down-slope
windstorms, individual risk such as skiing, recreational boating,
etc.) share a common generic structure – a blueprint
– in terms of which of their various different characteristics
can be systematically represented and understood (i.e. “one-size
fits all” proposal)? Or, are risk issues inherently
disordered, inevitably different from each other, and open
to unaccountably different interpretations and actions by
different people (i.e. risk is situational, site-specific
and context-specific)? Investigation was carried out based
on a set of four frequently asked questions on risks. The
risk questions are: “how big are the risks?”,
“are there any doubts?”, “are the risks
acceptable” and “does everyone agree?”.
The research locates a minimal but necessary set of properties
of risk issues that are common in all risks and identifies
the interplay of these properties. Risk can now be formalised
and is defined as the union of the scientific knowledge about
expected physical detriment (determined from scientific findings),
scientific certitudes (i.e. the degree of confidence of scientists
in those findings), active (i.e. socially constructed) and
inner (i.e. intuitive & gut feelings) knowledge of constituency
(expert to lay people) in society, and the certitudes of that
active and inner knowledge. The research findings have significant
implications for shifting the current “end-of-pipeline”
to the “management of people’s risk knowledge”
approach of risk management. A desktop case study of Cryptosporidium
in drinking water supplies in England and Wales was used as
an illustrative example.
|
