The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework
Roger E. Kasperson
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorOrtwin Renn
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorPaul Slovic
Decision Research, 1201 Oak Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401.
Search for more papers by this authorHalina S. Brown
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorJacque Emel
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorRobert Goble
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorJeanne X. Kasperson
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Alan Shawn Feinstein World Hunger Program, Box 1831 Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912.
Search for more papers by this authorSamuel Ratick
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorRoger E. Kasperson
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorOrtwin Renn
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorPaul Slovic
Decision Research, 1201 Oak Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401.
Search for more papers by this authorHalina S. Brown
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorJacque Emel
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorRobert Goble
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorJeanne X. Kasperson
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Alan Shawn Feinstein World Hunger Program, Box 1831 Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912.
Search for more papers by this authorSamuel Ratick
CENTED, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 01610.
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
One of the most perplexing problems in risk analysis is why some relatively minor risks or risk events, as assessed by technical experts, often elicit strong public concerns and result in substantial impacts upon society and economy. This article sets forth a conceptual framework that seeks to link systematically the technical assessment of risk with psychological, sociological, and cultural perspectives of risk perception and risk-related behavior. The main thesis is that hazards interact with psychological, social, institutional, and cultural processes in ways that may amplify or attenuate public responses to the risk or risk event. A structural description of the social amplification of risk is now possible. Amplification occurs at two stages: in the transfer of information about the risk, and in the response mechanisms of society. Signals about risk are processed by individual and social amplification stations, including the scientist who communicates the risk assessment, the news media, cultural groups, interpersonal networks, and others. Key steps of amplifications can be identified at each stage. The amplified risk leads to behavioral responses, which, in turn, result in secondary impacts. Models are presented that portray the elements and linkages in the proposed conceptual framework.
References
- 1
P. Slovic,
B. Fischhoff, and
S. Lichtenstein, “Why Study Risk Perception
Risk Analysis
2, 83–94 (1982).
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01369.x Google Scholar
- 2 O. Renn, “ Risk Perception: A Systematic Review of Concepts and Research Results,” in Avoiding and Managing Environmental Damage from Major Industrial Accidents, Proceedings of the Air Pollution Control Association International Conference in Vancouver, Canada , November 1985 (The Association, Pittsburgh, 1986), pp. 377–408.
- 3 S. Rayner and R. Cantor, “How Fair is Safe Enough? The Cultural Approach to Societal Technology Choice,” Risk Analysis 7, 3–13 (1987).
- 4 P. Slovic, “Perception of Risk,” Science 236, 280–290 (1987).
- 5 C. A. Vlek and P. J. M. Stallen, “Judging Risks and Benefits in the Small and the Large,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 28, 235–271 (1981).
- 6
J. M. Doderlein, “Understanding Risk Management,”
Risk Analysis
3, 17–21 (1983).
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1983.tb00102.x Google Scholar
- 7 R. E. Kasperson, (ed.), Equity Issues in Radioactive Waste Management ( Cambridge , Oelgeschlager , Gunn and Hain, 1983).
- 8 H. J. Otway and D. von Winterfeldt, “Beyond Acceptable Risk: On the Social Acceptability of Technologies,” Policy Sciences 14, 247–256 (1982).
- 9 B. Wynne, “ Public Perceptions of Risk,” in The Urban Transportation of Irradiated Fuel, J. Surrey, (ed.), (Macmillan, London , 1984), pp. 246–259.
- 10 B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, S. Lichtenstein, S. Read, and B. Combs, “How Safe is Safe Enough?: A Psychometric Study of Attitudes Towards Technological Risks and Benefits,” Policy Sciences 8, 127–152 (1978).
- 11 M. Douglas and A. Wildavsky, Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers (University of California Press, Berkeley , 1982).
- 12 B. Johnson. V. Covello, (eds.), Social and Cultural Construction of Risk (Reidel, Boston , 1987).
- 13 D. von Winterfeldt and W. Edwards, Understanding Public Disputes about Risky Technologies, technical report (Social Science Research Council, New York , 1984).
- 14 M. T. Katzman, Chemical Catastrophes: Regulating Environmental Risk Through Pollution Liability Insurance (R. D. Irwin, Springfield , Illinois , 1985).
- 15 C. D. Heising and V. P. George, “Nuclear Financial Risk: Economy Wide Cost of Reactor Accidents,” Energy Policy 14, 45–52 (1986).
- 16 H. I. Sharlin, EDB: A Case Study in the Communication of Health Risk (Office of Policy Analysis, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington , D.C. , 1985).
- 17 I. Hoos, “ Risk Assessment in Social Perspective,” in Perceptions of Risk (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, Washington , 1980), pp. 37–85.
- 18 M. L. DeFleur, Theories of Mass Communication (D. McKay, New York , 1966).
- 19 P. J. Shoemaker, “Mass Communication by the Book; A Review of 31 Texts,” Journal of Communication 37(3), 109–131 (1987).
- 20 H. D. Lasswell, “ The Structure and Function of Communication in Society,” in L. Bryson, (ed.), The Communication of Ideas: A Series of Addresses (Cooper Square Publishers, New York , 1948), pp. 32–35.
- 21 C. J. Hovland, “Social Communication,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 92, 371–375 (1948).
- 22 J. H. Sorensen and D. S. Mileti, “Decision-Making Uncertainties in Emergency Warning System Organizations,” International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters (in press).
- 23 S. Grunhouse, “ French and Swiss Fight about Tainted Cheese,” New York Times (January, 1988), p. 2.
- 24 P. Slovic, “Informing and Educating the Public about Risk,” Risk Analysis 6, 403–415 (1986).
- 25 A. Mazur, “The Journalist and Technology: Reporting about Love Canal and Three Mile Island,” Minerva 22, 45–66 (1984).
- 26 J. Sorensen et al., Impacts of Hazardous Technology: The Psycho-Social Effects of Restarting TMI (State University of New York Press, Albany , 1987).
- 27 A. Weinberg, “Is Nuclear Energy Acceptable Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 33(4), 54–60 (1977).
- 28
D. Kahneman,
P. Slovic,
A. Tversky, (eds.), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge University Press,
New York
, 1982).
10.1017/CBO9780511809477 Google Scholar
- 29 A. Mazur, The Dynamics of Technical Controversy (Communication Press, Washington , D.C. , 1981).
- 30 National Research Council, Disasters and the Mass Media (National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington , D.C. , 1980).
- 31 B. Combs and P. Slovic, “Newspaper Coverage of Causes of Death,” Journalism Quarterly 56, 837–843, 849 (1979).
- 32 H. Blumer, Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs , New Jersey , 1969).
- 33 E. Goffman, Stigma (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs , New Jersey , 1963).
- 34 P. Slovic, “ Forecasting the Adverse Economic Effects of a Nuclear Waste Repository,” in R. G. Post, (ed.), Waste Management '87 (Arizona Board of Regents, University of Arizona, Tuscon , 1987).
- 35 R. E. Kasperson, J. Emel, R. Goble, C. Hohenemser, J. X. Kasperson, and O. Renn, “ Radioactive Wastes and the Social Amplification of Risk,” in R. G. Post, (ed.), Waste Management '87 (Arizona Board of Regents, University of Arizona, Tucson , 1987).