Risk is a complex phenomenon that involves both biophysical attributes and social dimensions. Existing assessment and management approaches often fail to consider risk in its full complexity and its social context. The concept of the social amplification and attenuation of risk provides an approach that recognizes that how social institutions and structures process a risk will shape greatly its effects upon society and the responses of management institutions and people. Examples of both amplification and attenuation are provided from recent risk experience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
idem , Ecological Enlightenment: Essays on the Politics of the Risk Society (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1995).
2.
2. Roger E. Kaspersonet al., “The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework,”Risk Analysis, 8(2):177-191 (June 1988).
3.
3. James F. Short, Jr., “Defining, Explaining and Managing Risks,” in Organizations, Uncertainties, and Risk, ed. James F. Short, Jr. and Lee Clarke (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992), p. 4.
4.
4. President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, The Need for Change: The Legacy of TMI (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1979), pp. 8, 10.
5.
5. William R. Freudenburg, “Nothing Recedes Like Success? Risk Analysis and the Organizational Amplification of Risk,”Risk: Issues in Health and Safety, 3(1):13-14 (Winter 1992).
6.
6. For example, Roger E. Kasperson and Jeanne X. Kasperson, “Hidden Hazards,” in Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Risk Management, ed. Deborah G. Mayo and Rachelle D. Hollander (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), pp. 9-28.
7.
7. Robin Gregory, James Flynn, and Paul Slovic, “Technological Stigma,”American Scientist, 83(3):220 (May-June 1995).
8.
8. See the examples cited in Roger E. Kasperson, “The Social Amplification of Risk: Progress in Developing an Integrative Framework,” in Social Theories of Risk, ed. Sheldon Krimsky and Dominic Golding (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1992), pp. 153-178.
9.
9 For a thorough review of the accident, see The Radiological Accident in Goiânia (Vienna: International Atomic Energy Commission, 1988).
10.
10. Constantine J. Maletskos, ed., The Goiânia Radiation Accident, special issue of Health Physics, 60(1) (Jan. 1991). Taken together, the articles in this special issue constitute an excellent analysis of the health effects.
11.
Bradley Graham , “Victims of Radiation Ostracized in Brazil,”Washington Post, 8 Nov. 1987.
12.
Christine Gorman , “A Battle Against Deadly Dust,”Time, 16 Nov. 1987, p. 66.
13.
13. Paul Slovic, James Flynn, and Robin Gregory, “Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities,”Risk Analysis, 14(5):773-777 (Oct. 1994).
14.
14. Robert W. Kates, “Hazard Assessment: Art, Science, and Ideology,” in Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology, ed. Robert W. Kates, Christoph Hoheneinser, and Jeanne X. Kasperson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1985), pp. 258-259.
15.
15. Paul Harrison and Robin Palmer, News Out of Africa: Biafra and Band Aid (Wolfboro, NH: Hilary Shipman, 1986).
16.
Eleanor Singer and Phyllis M. Endreny, Reporting on Risk: How the Mass Media Portray Accidents, Diseases, Disasters, and Other Hazards (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1993), pp. 35-40.
17.
Charles Perrow and Mauro F. Guillén, The AIDS Disaster: The Failure of Organizations in New York and the Nation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990).
