Growing Pains: How Risk Perception and Risk Communication Research Can Help to Manage the Challenges of Global Population Growth

In 2011, the global human population reached 7 billion and medium variant projections indicate that it will exceed 9 billion before 2045. Theoretical and empirical perspectives suggest that this growth could lead to an increase in the likelihood of adverse events (e.g., food shortages, climate change, etc.) and/or the severity of adverse events (e.g., famines, natural disasters, etc.). Several scholars have posited that the size to which the global population grows and the extent to which this growth increases the likelihood of adverse outcomes will largely be shaped by individuals’ decisions (in households, organizations, governments, etc.). In light of the strong relationship between perceived risk and decision behaviors, it is surprising that there remains a dearth of empirical research that specifically examines the perceived risks of population growth and how these perceptions might influence related decisions. In an attempt to motivate this important strand of research, this article examines the major risks that may be exacerbated by global population growth and draws upon empirical work concerning the perception and communication of risk to identify potential directions for future research. The article also considers how individuals might perceive both the risks and benefits of population growth and be helped to better understand and address the related issues. The answers to these questions could help humanity better manage the emerging consequences of its continuing success in increasing infant survival and adult longevity.     

Risk Perception,Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors

Understanding public risk perceptions and their underlying processes is important in order to learn more about the way people interpret and respond to hazardous emergency events. Direct experience with an involuntary hazard has been found to heighten the perceived risk of experiencing the same hazard and its consequences in the future, but it remains unclear if cross‐over effects are possible (i.e., experience with one hazard influencing perceived risk for other hazards also). Furthermore, the impact of objective risk and country of residence on perceived risk is not well understood. As part of the BeSeCu (Behavior, Security, and Culture) Project, a sample of 1,045 survivors of emergencies from seven European countries (i.e., Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Turkey, and Italy) was drawn. Results revealed heightened perceived risk for emergency events (i.e., domestic and public fires, earthquakes, floods, and terrorist attacks) when the event had been experienced previously plus some evidence of cross‐over effects, although these effects were not so strong. The largest country differences in perceived risk were observed for earthquakes, but this effect was significantly reduced by taking into account the objective earthquake risk. For fires, floods, terrorist attacks, and traffic accidents, only small country differences in perceived risk were found. Further studies including a larger number of countries are welcomed.     

Informing Ex Ante Event Studies with Macro‐Econometric Evidence on the Structural and Policy Impacts of Terrorism

Economic consequence analysis is one of many inputs to terrorism contingency planning. Computable general equilibrium (CGE) models are being used more frequently in these analyses, in part because of their capacity to accommodate high levels of event‐specific detail. In modeling the potential economic effects of a hypothetical terrorist event, two broad sets of shocks are required: (1) physical impacts on observable variables (e.g., asset damage); (2) behavioral impacts on unobservable variables (e.g., investor uncertainty). Assembling shocks describing the physical impacts of a terrorist incident is relatively straightforward, since estimates are either readily available or plausibly inferred. However, assembling shocks describing behavioral impacts is more difficult. Values for behavioral variables (e.g., required rates of return) are typically inferred or estimated by indirect means. Generally, this has been achieved via reference to extraneous literature or ex ante surveys. This article explores a new method. We elucidate the magnitude of CGE‐relevant structural shifts implicit in econometric evidence on terrorist incidents, with a view to informing future ex ante event assessments. Ex post econometric studies of terrorism by Blomberg et al . yield macro econometric equations that describe the response of observable economic variables (e.g., GDP growth) to terrorist incidents. We use these equations to determine estimates for relevant (unobservable) structural and policy variables impacted by terrorist incidents, using a CGE model of the United States. This allows us to: (i) compare values for these shifts with input assumptions in earlier ex ante CGE studies; and (ii) discuss how future ex ante studies can be informed by our analysis.     

What's Wrong with Risk Matrices?

Risk matrices—tables mapping "frequency" and "severity" ratings to corresponding risk priority levels—are popular in applications as diverse as terrorism risk analysis, highway construction project management, office building risk analysis, climate change risk management, and enterprise risk management (ERM). National and international standards (e.g., Military Standard 882C and AS/NZS 4360:1999) have stimulated adoption of risk matrices by many organizations and risk consultants. However, little research rigorously validates their performance in actually improving risk management decisions. This article examines some mathematical properties of risk matrices and shows that they have the following limitations. (a) Poor Resolution . Typical risk matrices can correctly and unambiguously compare only a small fraction (e.g., less than 10%) of randomly selected pairs of hazards. They can assign identical ratings to quantitatively very different risks ("range compression"). (b) Errors . Risk matrices can mistakenly assign higher qualitative ratings to quantitatively smaller risks. For risks with negatively correlated frequencies and severities, they can be "worse than useless," leading to worse-than-random decisions. (c) Suboptimal Resource Allocation . Effective allocation of resources to risk-reducing countermeasures cannot be based on the categories provided by risk matrices. (d) Ambiguous Inputs and Outputs . Categorizations of severity cannot be made objectively for uncertain consequences. Inputs to risk matrices (e.g., frequency and severity categorizations) and resulting outputs (i.e., risk ratings) require subjective interpretation, and different users may obtain opposite ratings of the same quantitative risks. These limitations suggest that risk matrices should be used with caution, and only with careful explanations of embedded judgments.     

Marginal Trust in Risk Managers: Building and Losing Trust Following Decisions Under Uncertainty

Although a considerable amount of research has examined correlates of baseline public trust in risk managers, much less research has looked at marginal changes in public trust following specific events. Such research is important for identifying what kinds of events will lead to increases and decreases in public trust and thus for understanding how trust is built and lost. Using a taxonomy based upon signal detection theory (SDT), the current article presents two experimental studies examining marginal trust change following eight different types of events. Supporting predictions, cautious decisionmakers who accepted signs of danger (Hits and False Alarms) were more likely to be trusted than those who rejected them (All Clears and Misses). Moreover, transparency about an event was associated with higher levels of marginal trust than a lack of transparency in line with earlier findings. Contrary to predictions, however, trust was less affected by whether the decisions were correct (i.e., Hits and All Clears) or incorrect (i.e., False Alarms and Misses). This finding was primarily due to a "False Alarm Effect" whereby Open False Alarms led to positive increases in trust despite being incorrect assessments of risk. Results are explained in terms of a cue diagnosticity account of impression formation and suggest that a taxonomy of event types based on SDT may be useful in furthering our understanding of how public trust in risk managers is gained and lost.     

Understanding the Relationship Between Direct Experience and Risk Perception of Natural Hazards

Risk perception has been largely examined in studies that have aimed to explain and predict preparedness behavior in the context of natural hazards. Findings from studies on the relationship between previous experience, preparedness, and risk perception in disaster situations have been inconsistent. Hence, the main goal of this work was to explore the influence of physical and emotional experience on risk perception regarding natural hazards. This study was conducted in a statistically representative sample of the city of Iquique, in northern Chile (n = 701), who completed a survey one month after the occurrence of an earthquake and tsunami (8.2 Mw). The survey assessed the experience and preparation actions of survivors in relation to this event. Using a structural equation model, we examined nine proposed relationships, six of which were significant. The final model had an adequate fit (χ² = 752.23, df = 283, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.90, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.049). Direct experience showed the greatest influence on risk perception: while direct physical experience (i.e., the physical and material consequences associated with the earthquake) maintained a direct positive effect on risk perception, direct emotional experience (i.e., the fear of experiencing an earthquake) produced an indirect positive effect (through worry). Emotional experience, however, did not directly influence current preparedness and risk perception. Implications for understanding the relationship between risk perception and direct experience are discussed.     

Risk and the Media: A Comparison of Print and Televised News Stories of a Canadian Drinking Water Risk Event

This article explores the utility of using media analyses as a method for risk researchers to gain an initial understanding of how the public may perceive a risk issue or event based on how it is presented and communicated in news media stories. In the area of risk research, newspapers consistently provide coverage of both acute and chronic risk events, whereas televised news broadcasts report primarily acute risk events. There is no consensus in the literature about which news format (print vs. televised) may be better to study public conceptualizations of risk, or if one format (e.g., print) may be used as a surrogate measure for another format (e.g., televised). This study compares Canadian national televised and newspaper coverage of the same risk event: the E. coli contamination of a public drinking water supply. Using a content analysis, this study empirically demonstrates the overall similarity in story content coverage in both televised and print coverage, noting that televised coverage promotes primarily emotional story themes while print coverage tends to also include coverage of analysis and process. On this basis, the research draws two conclusions: 1) given its more comprehensive coverage, newspaper broadsheets may provide a better measure of media coverage of a risk event than televised coverage (if only one format can be studied); and 2) when the risk area of interest is chronic, and/or if the scale of analysis is at a community/local level (i.e., when it is unlikely that archived televised coverage is available), then a researcher may find the print media to be a more useful format to study.     

Risk Perception and the Value of Safety

This paper examines the relationship between perceived risk and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for increased safety from technological hazards in both conceptual and empirical terms. A conceptual model is developed in which a given household's WTP for risk reductions is a function of traditional socioeconomic variables (i.e., income and base level of risk) and perceived characteristics of the hazards (i.e., dread, knowledge, and exposure). Data to estimate the model are obtained through a combined contingent valuation and risk perception survey that considers 10 technological hazards, five of which are well-defined (e.g., death rates are known and the risks are relatively common) and five are less well-defined. Econometric results, using TOBIT estimation procedures, support the importance of both types of variables in explaining WTP across all 10 hazards. When the risks are split into two groups, the results show that WTP for well-defined hazards is most influenced by perceived personal exposure, while WTP for less well-defined risks is most influenced by levels of dread and severity.     

Risk Perception and Risk Talk: The Case of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Radiation Risk

Individuals’ perceptions and their interpersonal communication about a risk event, or risk talk, can play a significant role in the formation of societal responses to the risk event. As they formulate their risk opinions and speak to others, risk information can circulate through their social networks and contribute to the construction of their risk information environment. In the present study, Japanese citizens’ risk perception and risk talk were examined in the context of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear radiation risk. We hypothesized and found that the risk information environment and risk literacy (i.e., competencies to understand and use risk information) interact to influence their risk perception and risk talk. In particular, risk literacy tends to stabilize people's risk perceptions and their risk communications. Nevertheless, there were some subtle differences between risk perception and communication, suggesting the importance of further examination of interpersonal risk communication and its role in the societal responses to risk events.     

On the Complex Definition of Risk: A Systems-Based Approach

The premise of this article is that risk to a system, as well as its vulnerability and resilience, can be understood, defined, and quantified most effectively through a systems-based philosophical and methodological approach, and by recognizing the central role of the system states in this process. A universally agreed-upon definition of risk has been difficult to develop; one reason is that the concept is multidimensional and nuanced. It requires an understanding that risk to a system is inherently and fundamentally a function of the initiating event, the states of the system and of its environment, and the time frame. In defining risk, this article posits that: (a) the performance capabilities of a system are a function of its state vector; (b) a system's vulnerability and resilience vectors are each a function of the input (e.g., initiating event), its time of occurrence, and the states of the system; (c) the consequences are a function of the specificity and time of the event, the vector of the states, the vulnerability, and the resilience of the system; (d) the states of a system are time-dependent and commonly fraught with variability uncertainties and knowledge uncertainties; and (e) risk is a measure of the probability and severity of consequences. The above implies that modeling must evaluate consequences for each risk scenario as functions of the threat (initiating event), the vulnerability and resilience of the system, and the time of the event. This fundamentally complex modeling and analysis process cannot be performed correctly and effectively without relying on the states of the system being studied.     

Risks of Mortality and Morbidity from Worldwide Terrorism: 1968–2004

Worldwide data on terrorist incidents between 1968 and 2004 gathered by the RAND Corporation and the Oklahoma City National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT) were assessed for patterns and trends in morbidity/mortality. Adjusted data analyzed involve a total of 19,828 events, 7,401 "adverse" events (each causing >or= 1 victim), and 86,568 "casualties" (injuries), of which 25,408 were fatal. Most terror-related adverse events, casualties, and deaths involved bombs and guns. Weapon-specific patterns and terror-related risk levels in Israel (IS) have differed markedly from those of all other regions combined (OR). IS had a fatal fraction of casualties about half that of OR, but has experienced relatively constant lifetime terror-related casualty risks on the order of 0.5%--a level 2 to 3 orders of magnitude more than those experienced in OR that increased approximately 100-fold over the same period. Individual event fatality has increased steadily, the median increasing from 14% to 50%. Lorenz curves obtained indicate substantial dispersion among victim/event rates: about half of all victims were caused by the top 2.5% (or 10%) of harm-ranked events in OR (or IS). Extreme values of victim/event rates were approximated fairly well by generalized Pareto models (typically used to fit to data on forest fires, sea levels, earthquakes, etc.). These results were in turn used to forecast maximum OR- and IS-specific victims/event rates through 2080, illustrating empirically-based methods that could be applied to improve strategies to assess, prevent, and manage terror-related risks and consequences.     

The Effects of Expectation Disconfirmation on Appraisal,Affect, and Behavioral Intentions

People's risk perceptions can have powerful effects on their outcomes, yet little is known about how people respond to risk information that disconfirms a prior expectation. We experimentally examined the affective, cognitive, and behavioral consequences of expectation disconfirmation in the context of risk perceptions. Participants were randomly assigned and then prompted toward either a high or low personal risk estimate regarding a fictitious health threat. All participants then received the same risk feedback, which presented either a negative disconfirmation experience (i.e., worse than expected) in the high‐risk estimate condition or a positive disconfirmation experience (i.e., better than expected) in the low‐risk estimate condition. Participants who experienced the negative disconfirmation reported stronger intentions to prevent the threat in the future compared to participants who experienced the positive disconfirmation. This effect was mediated by both disappointment about the risk feedback and perceptions of the severity of the threat. These findings have implications for risk communication, suggesting that the provision of objective risk information may improve or diminish the likelihood of behavior change depending on people's initial expectations and their emotional and cognitive reactions to the information.     

Customer negative events and employee service sabotage: The roles of employee hostility,personality and group affective tone

Abstract

In the service industries, customer negative events towards a service provider, such as unreasonable demands or low-quality interpersonal treatment, might trigger service sabotage behaviours by the employee in response. Mitigating the problems associated with customer negative events is therefore an important issue for both practitioners and researchers. In the present study, we incorporate the perspectives of affective events theory into our research framework to clarify the mechanisms and boundary conditions of the customer negative event–service sabotage relationship in the context of face-to-face service. Specifically, we theorize and examine whether customer negative events lead to employee service sabotage through emotional reactions of the service worker (i.e. state hostility) and whether their personality traits (i.e. extraversion and neuroticism) and the work unit context (i.e. group affective tone) moderate this process. The sample was composed of 195 hairstylists and 61 managers from 61 hair salons in Taiwan. The results of hierarchical linear modelling showed that hairstylists' state hostility mediated the negative event–sabotage relationship. In addition, hairstylists' neuroticism and the affective tone of the unit moderated the relationship between negative events and state hostility, which in turn predicted service sabotage. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are also discussed.     

Fault and Event Tree Analyses for Process Systems Risk Analysis: Uncertainty Handling Formulations

Quantitative risk analysis (QRA) is a systematic approach for evaluating likelihood, consequences, and risk of adverse events. QRA based on event (ETA) and fault tree analyses (FTA) employs two basic assumptions. The first assumption is related to likelihood values of input events, and the second assumption is regarding interdependence among the events (for ETA) or basic events (for FTA). Traditionally, FTA and ETA both use crisp probabilities; however, to deal with uncertainties, the probability distributions of input event likelihoods are assumed. These probability distributions are often hard to come by and even if available, they are subject to incompleteness (partial ignorance) and imprecision. Furthermore, both FTA and ETA assume that events (or basic events) are independent. In practice, these two assumptions are often unrealistic. This article focuses on handling uncertainty in a QRA framework of a process system. Fuzzy set theory and evidence theory are used to describe the uncertainties in the input event likelihoods. A method based on a dependency coefficient is used to express interdependencies of events (or basic events) in ETA and FTA. To demonstrate the approach, two case studies are discussed.     

Effects of Risk Representation and Scope on Willingness to Pay for Reduced Risks: Evidence from Tokyo Bay, Japan

When applying the contingent valuation method (CVM) in risk reduction studies, some studies report that willingness to pay (WTP) is insensitive to the magnitude of risk reduction while other studies do not. On the other hand, social-psychological research has shown that the affect heuristic biases judgments on probability, relative frequency, and risk. This article examines both magnitude (or scope) effect and affect heuristic (or representation) effect on WTP for risk reduction measures against tsunamis by introducing two experimental (i.e., absolute and relative) systems with four different representations to evaluate public behaviors in two different scenarios of risk reduction. Two common denominators (100 and 10,000) are introduced into absolute risk reduction representation (i.e., "of every 100 persons, from present 2 deaths to 1") to form different formats (i.e., "of every 10,000 persons from 200 to 100," and "of every 100,000 persons from 2,000 deaths to 1,000"). There is little evidence that WTP estimates are sufficiently sensitive to the magnitude of risk reduction, but relative risk reduction representations may be better than the absolute one given in CVM mail surveys when the risk is small. There is a statistically insignificant effect of risk reduction representations on respondent frequency, but mixed effects on the monetary values of WTP at the level of 0.05. The representation effect of absolute risk reduction on the WTP value varies with the common denominator. The larger the common denominator, the less the WTP to reduce the risk of tsunamis, and the significance probability is improved to less than the level of 0.05 when the common denominator becomes large enough. The findings suggest that improved methods are required for estimating the rates of tradeoff between fatality risk and other goods among consumers.     

An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis

Quantitative risk analysis is being extensively employed to support policymakers and provides a strong conceptual framework for evaluating decision alternatives under uncertainty. Many problems involving environmental risks are, however, of a spatial nature, i.e., containing spatial impacts, spatial vulnerabilities, and spatial risk‐mitigation alternatives. Recent developments in multicriteria spatial analysis have enabled the assessment and aggregation of multiple impacts, supporting policymakers in spatial evaluation problems. However, recent attempts to conduct spatial multicriteria risk analysis have generally been weakly conceptualized, without adequate roots in quantitative risk analysis. Moreover, assessments of spatial risk often neglect the multidimensional nature of spatial impacts (e.g., social, economic, human) that are typically occurring in such decision problems. The aim of this article is therefore to suggest a conceptual quantitative framework for environmental multicriteria spatial risk analysis based on expected multi‐attribute utility theory. The framework proposes: (i) the formal assessment of multiple spatial impacts; (ii) the aggregation of these multiple spatial impacts; (iii) the assessment of spatial vulnerabilities and probabilities of occurrence of adverse events; (iv) the computation of spatial risks; (v) the assessment of spatial risk mitigation alternatives; and (vi) the design and comparison of spatial risk mitigation alternatives (e.g., reductions of vulnerabilities and/or impacts). We illustrate the use of the framework in practice with a case study based on a flood‐prone area in northern Italy.     

On Some Recent Definitions and Analysis Frameworks for Risk,Vulnerability, and Resilience

Recently, considerable attention has been paid to a systems‐based approach to risk, vulnerability, and resilience analysis. It is argued that risk, vulnerability, and resilience are inherently and fundamentally functions of the states of the system and its environment. Vulnerability is defined as the manifestation of the inherent states of the system that can be subjected to a natural hazard or be exploited to adversely affect that system, whereas resilience is defined as the ability of the system to withstand a major disruption within acceptable degradation parameters and to recover within an acceptable time, and composite costs, and risks. Risk, on the other hand, is probability based, defined by the probability and severity of adverse effects (i.e., the consequences). In this article, we look more closely into this approach. It is observed that the key concepts are inconsistent in the sense that the uncertainty (probability) dimension is included for the risk definition but not for vulnerability and resilience. In the article, we question the rationale for this inconsistency. The suggested approach is compared with an alternative framework that provides a logically defined structure for risk, vulnerability, and resilience, where all three concepts are incorporating the uncertainty (probability) dimension.     

Offenders’ Risk‐Taking Attitude Inside and Outside the Prison Walls

It has long been assumed that risk taking is closely associated with criminal behavior. One reason for placing criminals behind bars—aside from punishment and protecting the public—is to prevent them from engaging in further risky criminal activities. Limited attention has been paid to whether being inside or outside prison affects offenders’ risk‐taking behaviors and attitudes. We compared risk‐taking behaviors and attitudes in five risk domains (ethical, financial, health/safety, recreational, social) among 75 incarcerated offenders (i.e., offenders who are currently in prison) and 45 ex‐offenders (i.e., offenders who have just been released from prison). Ex‐offenders reported higher likelihood of engaging in risky behavior, driven largely by a willingness to take more risks in the recreational and ethical domains. Benefits attributed to risk taking as well as risk perception did not differ between incarcerated and ex‐offenders, indicating that the opportunity to take risks might underlie behavioral risk intentions. Our results also indicate that risk‐taking activities are better predicted by the expected benefits rather than by risk perception, aside from the health/safety domain. These results highlight the importance of studying the person and the environment and examining risk taking in a number of content domains.     

Assessing the Effects of Information About Global Population Growth on Risk Perceptions and Support for Mitigation and Prevention Strategies

The human population is forecast to increase by 3–4 billion people during this century and many scientists have expressed concerns that this could increase the likelihood of certain adverse events (e.g., climate change and resource shortages). Recent research shows that these concerns are mirrored in public risk perceptions and that these perceptions correlate with a willingness to adopt mitigation behaviors (e.g., reduce resource consumption) and preventative actions (e.g., support actions to limit growth). However, little research has assessed the factors that influence risk perceptions of global population growth (GPG). To contribute to this important goal, this article presents three studies that examined how risk perceptions of GPG might be influenced by textual‐visual representations (like those in media and Internet articles) of the potential effects of GPG. Study 1 found that a textual narrative that highlighted the potential negative (cf. positive) consequences of GPG led to higher perceived risk and greater willingness to adopt mitigation behaviors, but not to support preventative actions. Notably, the influence of the narratives on perceived risk was largely moderated by the participant's prior knowledge and perceptions of GPG. Contrary to expectations, studies 2 and 3 revealed, respectively, that photographs depicting GPG‐related imagery and graphs depicting GPG rates had no significant effect on the perceived risk of GPG or the willingness to embrace mitigation or preventative actions. However, study 3 found that individuals with higher “graph literacy” perceived GPG as a higher risk and were more willing to adopt mitigation behaviors and support preventative actions.