Risk Science Contributions: Three Illustrating Examples

This article aims to demonstrate that risk science is important for society, industry and all of us. Rather few people today, including scientists and managers, are familiar with what this science is about—its foundation and main features—and how it is used to gain knowledge and improve communication and decision making in real-life situations. The article seeks to meet this challenge, by presenting three examples, showing how risk science works to gain new generic, fundamental knowledge on risk concepts, principles, and methods, as well as supporting the practical tackling of actual risk problems.     

Cases of real-life policies related to risk: How can they enhance risk analysis and risk science?

Policies on risk constitute a core topic of risk analysis and risk science, and it is common at risk conferences to present real-life cases of such policies, for example related to the handling of climate change and pandemics. Although these are of broad interest, showing how important issues in society are dealt with, it can be questioned to what extent and how these cases contribute to enhancing risk analysis and risk science. The present paper addresses this concern. It is argued that, in order to learn from the cases, they need in general to be more thoroughly followed up with discussions of concepts, principles, approaches, and methods for assessing, characterizing, communicating and handling risk. Describing a governmental policy on, for example, the handling of COVID-19 is a point of departure for interesting discussions concerning its justification and performance, in particular in relation to risk and the most updated knowledge from the risk analysis field. Such discussions are, however, often lacking. The paper points to some key obstacles and challenges for the learning process, including the difficulty of distinguishing between policies, policy analysis, and politics.     

Is Risk Analysis Scientific?

This article discusses to what extent risk analysis is scientific in view of a set of commonly used definitions and criteria. We consider scientific knowledge to be characterized by its subject matter, its success in developing the best available knowledge in its fields of study, and the epistemic norms and values that guide scientific investigations. We proceed to assess the field of risk analysis according to these criteria. For this purpose, we use a model for risk analysis in which science is used as a base for decision making on risks, which covers the five elements evidence, knowledge base, broad risk evaluation, managerial review and judgment, and the decision; and that relates these elements to the domains experts and decisionmakers, and to the domains fact‐based or value‐based. We conclude that risk analysis is a scientific field of study, when understood as consisting primarily of (i) knowledge about risk‐related phenomena, processes, events, etc., and (ii) concepts, theories, frameworks, approaches, principles, methods and models to understand, assess, characterize, communicate, and manage risk, in general and for specific applications (the instrumental part).     

Foundational Challenges for Advancing the Field and Discipline of Risk Analysis

Risk analysis as a field and discipline is about concepts, principles, approaches, methods, and models for understanding, assessing, communicating, managing, and governing risk. The foundation of this field and discipline has been subject to continuous discussion since its origin some 40 years ago with the establishment of the Society for Risk Analysis and the Risk Analysis journal. This article provides a perspective on critical foundational challenges that this field and discipline faces today, for risk analysis to develop and have societal impact. Topics discussed include fundamental questions important for defining the risk field, discipline, and science; the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary features of risk analysis; the interactions and dependencies with other sciences; terminology and fundamental principles; and current developments and trends, such as the use of artificial intelligence.     

On Funtowicz and Ravetz's “Decision Stake—System Uncertainties” Structure and Recently Developed Risk Perspectives

The Funtowicz and Ravetz model for classifying problem‐solving strategies into applied sciences, professional consultancy, and postnormal sciences is well known in the social science risk literature. The model is illustrated in a diagram based on the two axes: (i) decision stakes—the value dimension (costs, benefits) and (ii) the system uncertainties—the knowledge dimension. These axes resemble the same two dimensions that characterize some recently developed risk perspectives: (a) consequences and the severity of these consequences and (b) associated uncertainties. In this article, we make a detailed comparison of these two types of risk frameworks. We point to similarities and differences in motivation and use. A main conclusion of the article is that these risk perspectives all provide adequate scientific bases for the Funtowicz and Ravetz model. New insights are provided on the understanding of what the outcome stakes/consequences and uncertainty dimensions really capture in these perspectives and frameworks.     

Adversarial risk analysis for counterterrorism modeling

Recent large-scale terrorist attacks have raised interest in models for resource allocation against terrorist threats. The unifying theme in this area is the need to develop methods for the analysis of allocation decisions when risks stem from the intentional actions of intelligent adversaries. Most approaches to these problems have a game-theoretic flavor although there are also several interesting decision-analytic-based proposals. One of them is the recently introduced framework for adversarial risk analysis, which deals with decision-making problems that involve intelligent opponents and uncertain outcomes. We explore how adversarial risk analysis addresses some standard counterterrorism models: simultaneous defend-attack models, sequential defend-attack-defend models, and sequential defend-attack models with private information. For each model, we first assess critically what would be a typical game-theoretic approach and then provide the corresponding solution proposed by the adversarial risk analysis framework, emphasizing how to coherently assess a predictive probability model of the adversary's actions, in a context in which we aim at supporting decisions of a defender versus an attacker. This illustrates the application of adversarial risk analysis to basic counterterrorism models that may be used as basic building blocks for more complex risk analysis of counterterrorism problems.     

组织管理学科的理论形态与创新途径

在论述成熟学科理论形态的基础上,以组织行为学为例,系统地分析了当前组织管理理论存在的问题,并提出了理论创新的途径与策略建议.研究结果表明,一门成熟的学科通常有多种不同的理论形态,揭示事物本质的理论、揭示概念间关系的理论、揭示事物演变规律的理论,以及元理论等抽象程度高的理论形态应该居于更重要的地位,但这些理论形态恰恰是当前组织管理学科比较缺乏的.     

Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives

A substantial body of risk research indicates that women and men differ in their perceptions of risk. This paper discusses how they differ and why. A review of a number of existing empirical studies of risk perception points at several problems, regarding what gender differences are found in such studies, and how these differences are accounted for. Firstly, quantitative approaches, which have so far dominated risk research, and qualitative approaches give different, sometimes even contradictory images of women's and men's perceptions of risk. Secondly, the gender differences that appear are often left unexplained, and even when explanations are suggested, these are seldom related to gender research and gender theory in any systematic way. This paper argues that a coherent, theoretically informed gender perspective on risk is needed to improve the understanding of women's and men's risk perceptions. An analysis of social theories of gender points out some relations and distinctions which should be considered in such a perspective. It is argued that gender structures, reflected in gendered ideology and gendered practice, give rise to systematic gender differences in the perception of risk. These gender differences may be of different kinds, and their investigation requires the use of qualitative as well as quantitative methods. In conclusion, the arguments about gender and risk perception are brought together in a theoretical model which might serve as a starting point for further research.     

Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: The Need for a Transdisciplinary Approach

Microbial food safety has been the focus of research across various disciplines within the risk analysis community. Natural scientists involved in food microbiology and related disciplines work on the identification of health hazards, and the detection of pathogenic microorganisms. To perform risk assessment, research activities are increasingly focused on the quantification of microbial contamination of food products at various stages in the food chain, and modeling the impact of this contamination on human health. Social scientists conduct research into how consumers perceive food risks, and how best to develop effective risk communication with consumers in order to improve public health through improved food handling practices. The two approaches converge at the end of the food chain, where the activities regarding food preparation and food consumption are considered. Both natural and social sciences may benefit from input and expertise from the perspective of the alternative discipline, although, to date, the integration of social and natural sciences has been somewhat limited. This article therefore explores the potential of a transdisciplinary approach to food risk analysis in terms of delivering additional improvements to public health. Developing knowledge arising from research in both the natural and social sciences, we present a novel framework involving the integration of the two approaches that might provide the most effective way to improve the consumer health associated with food-borne illness.     

Disaster risk and artificial intelligence: A framework to characterize conceptual synergies and future opportunities

Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have revolutionized and redefined the landscape of data analysis in business, healthcare, and technology. These methods have innovated the applied mathematics, computer science, and engineering fields and are showing considerable potential for risk science, especially in the disaster risk domain. The disaster risk field has yet to define itself as a necessary application domain for AI implementation by defining how to responsibly balance AI and disaster risk. (1) How is AI being used for disaster risk applications; and how are these applications addressing the principles and assumptions of risk science, (2) What are the benefits of AI being used for risk applications; and what are the benefits of applying risk principles and assumptions for AI-based applications, (3) What are the synergies between AI and risk science applications, and (4) What are the characteristics of effective use of fundamental risk principles and assumptions for AI-based applications? This study develops and disseminates an online survey questionnaire that leverages expertise from risk and AI professionals to identify the most important characteristics related to AI and risk, then presents a framework for gauging how AI and disaster risk can be balanced. This study is the first to develop a classification system for applying risk principles for AI-based applications. This classification contributes to understanding of AI and risk by exploring how AI can be used to manage risk, how AI methods introduce new or additional risk, and whether fundamental risk principles and assumptions are sufficient for AI-based applications.     

The triangle <Emphasis Type="Italic">k</Emphasis>-club problem

Graph models have long been used in social network analysis and other social and natural sciences to render the analysis of complex systems easier. In applied studies, to understand the behaviour of social networks and the interactions that command that behaviour, it is often necessary to identify sets of elements which form cohesive groups, i.e., groups of actors that are strongly interrelated. The clique concept is a suitable representation for groups of actors that are all directly related pair-wise. However, many social relationships are established not only face-to-face but also through intermediaries, and the clique concept misses all the latter. To deal with these cases, it is necessary to adopt approaches that relax the clique concept. In this paper we introduce a new clique relaxation—the triangle k-club—and its associated maximization problem—the maximum triangle k-club problem. We propose integer programming formulations for the problem, stated in different variable spaces, and derive valid inequalities to strengthen their linear programming relaxations. Computational results on randomly generated and real-world graphs, with \(k=2\) and \(k=3\), are reported.     

Chaos and Transformation Theories: A Theoretical Analysis with Implications for Organization Theory and Public Management

Chaos and transformation theories have emerged as new currencies in social sciences in general and in systems design and management, and in futuristic studies in particular. This article analyzes chaos and transformation theories in historical and contemporary perspectives, their contributions to social science in general, and organization theory and public management in particular. The notions of chaos and order, change and continuity, and uncertainty and certainty are analyzed along with the growing realization of complexity and non-linear dynamic features of modern organizations and the hard reality of a constant necessity to acquire new knowledge and learn to manage organizations with flexibility and innovation. Finally, the article addresses some of the limitations of chaos theory and outlines a number of implications for organization theory and public management in the age of globalization.     

基于交叉效率DEA与群体共识的区间乘性语言偏好关系群决策

针对区间乘性语言偏好关系群决策问题，提出了一种基于交叉效率DEA和群体共识的群决策方法。首先，提出乘性语言偏好关系导出函数的定义，并构建产出导向的DEA模型，证明了一致性乘性语言偏好关系的DEA效率得分与排序向量之间存在比例关系。在此基础上，建立基于理想值的交叉效率DEA模型，提出乘性语言偏好关系的通用排序方法。同时，基于群体共识建立目标规划模型来计算各语言偏好关系的权重系数。最后，利用Monte Carlo随机模拟的方法对群体语言偏好空间进行统计分析，得到群决策期望排序向量及其可信度。算例分析表明本文方法能够有效的避免信息损失，具有较强的适用性和较高的可信度。     

Producing ratio measures of effect with quantitative microbial risk assessment

Estimating the risk of infections or other outcomes incident to pathogen exposure is a primary goal of quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA). Such estimates are useful to predict population-level risks, to evaluate exposures based on normative or tolerable risk guidelines, and to interpret the likely public health relevance of microbial measurements in environmental media. To evaluate alternative control measures (interventions), ratio estimates of effect (e.g., odds and risk ratios) are needed that are more broadly interpretable in the health sciences and consistent with convention in epidemiology. In this paper, we propose a general method for estimating widely used ratio measures of effect derived from stochastic QMRA approaches, including the generation of appropriate confidence intervals. Such QMRA-derived ratios can be used as a basis for evaluating interventions via hypothesis testing and for inclusion in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in a form consistent with risk estimation approaches commonly used in epidemiology.     

Variability and Uncertainty in Swedish Exposure Factors for Use in Quantitative Exposure Assessments

Information of exposure factors used in quantitative risk assessments has previously been compiled and reported for U.S. and European populations. However, due to the advancement of science and knowledge, these reports are in continuous need of updating with new data. Equally important is the change over time of many exposure factors related to both physiological characteristics and human behavior. Body weight, skin surface, time use, and dietary habits are some of the most obvious examples covered here. A wealth of data is available from literature not primarily gathered for the purpose of risk assessment. Here we review a number of key exposure factors and compare these factors between northern Europe—here represented by Sweden—and the United States. Many previous compilations of exposure factor data focus on interindividual variability and variability between sexes and age groups, while uncertainty is mainly dealt with in a qualitative way. In this article variability is assessed along with uncertainty. As estimates of central tendency and interindividual variability, mean, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, and multiple percentiles were calculated, while uncertainty was characterized using 95% confidence intervals for these parameters. The presented statistics are appropriate for use in deterministic analyses using point estimates for each input parameter as well as in probabilistic assessments.     

Indiscriminate,Irrelevant, and Sometimes Wrong: Causal Misconceptions about Climate Change

Prior research demonstrates widespread persistence of beliefs about climate change causes and risks that are arguably misconceptions. They include believing pollution causes climate change, believing ozone depletion causes climate change, the combination of these two “green beliefs,” referred to as environmental problems, and believing natural climate variation significantly contributes to current climate trends. Each of these causal beliefs has the potential to weaken or divert support away from effective climate change risk mitigation policies. To assess this potential, we explore the nature and prevalence of these beliefs in the United States with a national sample of interviews (N = 77) and two national surveys (N = 1,013, N = 1,820), and apply regression and mediation analyses to explore whether they explain any of the variation in individuals’ concern or support for policy to mitigate climate change. Adherence to these beliefs—which reflect a variety of misconceptions illustrated in the interviews—differs by political ideology but is common, with over a third of interviewees mentioning one or more. Controlling for general knowledge, political ideology, and other factors, misconceptions about environmental problems are still associated directly with support for climate change policies. On average adherence to the belief that environmental problems cause climate change is associated with a 25% higher probability of policy support. In contrast, believing natural climate variability is a major recent cause of climate change is associated with a 7% lower probability of supporting climate policy, even after controlling for political ideology and other knowledge about climate change.     

Measurement for evaluation

Problems of measurement in management science are discussed in the context of methods of evaluation. Different approaches to evaluation are compared in terms of the level of measurement required and the process of generating numerical values. It is suggested that the difficulties of measuring are not always appreciated and that soundly-based measures are products of theories developed and tested within a consensus on basic constructs. Conclusions are drawn for the practitioner to set his level of measurement in terms of consensual understanding and suggestions are made for research.     

Methods for Uncertainty Analysis: A Comparative Survey

This paper presents a survey and comparative evaluation of methods which have been developed for the determination of uncertainties in accident consequences and probabilities, for use in probabilistic risk assessment. The methods considered are: analytic techniques, Monte Carlo simulation, response surface approaches, differential sensitivity techniques, and evaluation of classical statistical confidence bounds. It is concluded that only the response surface and differential sensitivity approaches are sufficiently general and flexible for use as overall methods of uncertainty analysis in probabilistic risk assessment. The other methods considered, however, are very useful in particular problems.     

Risk and Climate Change: Perceptions of Key Policy Actors in Canada

This article examines factors that predict perceptions of risk associated with global climate change. The research focuses on the perceptions of those associated with climate change policy making in the prairie region of Canada. The data are from an online survey ( n = 851) of those policy actors. The analysis integrates several dominant approaches to the study of risk perception: psychometric approaches that examine the effects of cognitive structure; demographic assessments that examine, for example, differences in perception based on gender or family status; and political approaches that suggest that one's position in the policy process may affect his or her perceived risk. Attitudes toward climate change are to a degree predicted by all of these factors, but only when indirect effects are observed. Sociodemographic characteristics have little direct effect on perceived risk, but do affect general beliefs that affect risk perceptions. Perceived risk is related more strongly to these general beliefs or world views than to more specific beliefs about the effects of climate change on weather patterns. Position within the policy process also contributes to our understanding of perceptions, with industry and governmental actors demonstrating similar attitudes, which contrast with environmental groups and university researchers.