Email this article 
On Communicating the Uncertainty of Risk
(*) Corresponding author
DOI's assignment:
the author of the article can submit here a request for assignment of a DOI number to this resource!
Cost of the service: euros 10,00 (for a DOI)
Abstract
There are now a number of guides to help civil engineering professionals communicate risk. However the available techniques to deliberate on, identify and manage risk still require development especially for dealing with uncertain open world ‘wicked’ problems with low probability and high impact as confirmed by a recent high level government review in the UK. A well known, but not well understood, paradox at the heart of practical life is that on the one hand we routinely make risky practical decisions perfectly well but on the other hand our judgements about statistically testable risks are sometimes significantly in error. We maintain that managing uncertainty is the key; that classifying uncertainty as either aleatoric or epistemic is insufficient; and that standard probability theory has to become an interval measure which we characterise as an ‘Italian Flag’. A framework is proposed, based on evidence theory, through which all types of uncertainties about risk can be expressed in a way which is simpler to communicate, easier to understand and hence is a basis for improved risk management
Copyright © 2013 Praise Worthy Prize - All rights reserved.
Keywords
References
Government Office for Science, Blackett Review of High Impact Low Probability Risks, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, London. See at http://www.bis.gov.uk/foresight - accessed April 2012.
Interdepartmental Liaison Group on Risk Assessment. (1997-8). Risk Communication: A Guide to Regulatory Practice, HSE, London.
Risk& Regulation Advisory Council. (2009). A Practical Guide to Public Risk Communication, Government Office for Science, London.
Adler, P. S., & Kranowitz, J. L. (2005). A Primer on Perceptions of Risk, Risk Communication and Building Trust, The Keystone Center, Colorado, USA.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). Communicating in a Crisis: Risk Communication Guidelines for Public Officials. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/e359222004-001
Lundgren, R. E., & McMakin, A. H. (2009). Risk Communication, IEEE, John Wiley, New Jersey.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470480120
Fischhoff, B. (1995). Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process, Risk Analysis, 15(2).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00308.x
Warden, J. K., (2008). The Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies, Risk Analysis, 28(6).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01108.x
Peters, R. G., Covello, V. T., McCallum, D. B. (1997). The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication, Risk Analysis 17(1), 43-54.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00842.x
National Research Council (NRA), (1996). Understanding Risk: nforming Decisions in a Democratic Society, Washington DC: National Academic Press.
Blockley, D. I., & Godfrey, P. S. (2000). Doing it Differently, Thomas Telford, London.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/didsfrc.27480
Blockley, D. (2010). The importance of being process, Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 27(3), 189-199.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2010.482658
Thompson, K. M., (2002). Variability and Uncertainty meet Risk Management and Risk Communication, Risk Analysis, 22(3), 647-654.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00044
Flage, R., & Aven T., (2009). Expressing and Communicating Uncertainty in Relation to Quantitative Risk Analysis, R&RATA, 2, June, 9-18.
Gigerenzer, G., (2003). Reckoning with Risk, Penguin Books, London.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf03083245
Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance, Earthscan, UK.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9286-7
Blockley, D., (1980). The Nature of Structural Design and Safety, Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620170218
Helton, J. C., Burmaster, D. E., (eds) (1996). Special Issue on Treatment of Aleatory and Epistemic Uncertainty, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 54(2-3).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0951-8320(96)00066-x
Hacking, I., (1975). The Emergence of Probability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0031819100018866
Huber, W. A., (2010) Ignorance is not probability, Risk Analysis, 30(3), 371-376
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.x
Norton, J. D., (2011) Ignorance and Indifference. Philosophy of Science, 75(2008). See http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/II.pdf. Accessed April 2012
Turner, B. A. & Pidgeon, N. F., (1998). Man-Made Disasters.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13698579908407022
Blockley, D. I., (2009). Uncertainty, Prediction or Control, International Journal of Engineering Under Uncertainty: Hazards, Assessment and Mitigation, 1(1-2).
Blockley, D. I., (2008). Managing Risks to Structures, ICE Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Structures & Buildings 161(SB4), August, 231–237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/stbu.2008.161.4.231
Blockley, D. I., (2012). Analysing uncertainties: towards comparing Bayesian and interval probabilities. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing (under review)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2012.05.007
Zadeh, L. A., (1973). Outline of a New Approach to the Analysis of Complex Systems and Decision Processes, IEEE Trans Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-3(1). January.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tsmc.1973.5408575
Blockley, D. I.(1985) Fuzziness and probability: a discussion of Gaines5 axioms, Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 2(4), 195-200.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02630258508970406
Shafer, G. (1976). A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press.
Cui, W. C., & Blockley, D. I., (1990). Interval Probability Theory for Evidential Support, Int. J. Intelligent Systems 5(2), June, 183-192.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/int.4550050204
Walley, P. (1991). Statistical Reasoning with imprecise probabilities, Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3472-7
Bradley, S., (2010, 2011). Dutch books and ambiguity, Pluralism in the foundations of statistics, University of Kent, September. See http://www.kent.ac.uk/secl/philosophy/jw/2010/plurastats/Bradley-handout.pdf . Accessed April 2012. Also Bradley, S., Dutch Book Arguments and Imprecise Probabilities, See http://www.seamusbradley.net/Papers/dba-ip.pdf accessed April 2012.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Please send any question about this web site to info@praiseworthyprize.com
Copyright © 2005-2024 Praise Worthy Prize
