Comparative Emergency Management

1. Comparative Emergency Management Session 11 Slide Deck Session 11

2. Session Objectives • Provide an Overview of Risk Perception Theory • Explain the Importance of Risk Perception in Risk Communication • Facilitate a Class Exercise on the Influence of Risk Perception Throughout the World Session 11

3. Risk Perception A study within the discipline of sociology that looks at why people fear the things they do (and also why they do not fear other things) Session 11

4. Risk Fallibility Conclusion 1 • Cognitive limitations, coupled with the anxieties generated by facing life as a gamble, cause uncertainty to be denied, risks to be distorted, and statements of fact to be believed with unwarranted confidence • Mexico City Example – over-estimated fear of crime Session 11

5. Risk Fallibility Conclusion 2 • Perceived risk is influenced (and sometimes biased) by the imaginability and memorability of the hazard • People may not have valid perceptions about even familiar risks • People underestimate common risks and overestimate rarer risks Session 11

6. Risk Fallibility Conclusion 3 • Disaster management experts’ risk perceptions correspond closely to statistical frequencies of death • Laypeople’s risk perceptions are based in part on frequencies of death, but there are many other qualitative aspects that affect their personal rating of risks Session 11

7. Risk Factors Related to Dread • Dreaded vs. not dreaded • Uncontrollable vs. controllable • Globally catastrophic vs. not globally catastrophic • Fatal consequences vs. not fatal consequences • Not equitable vs. equitable • Catastrophic vs. individual • High risk to future generations vs. low risk to future generations • Not easily reduced vs. easily reduced • Risk increasing vs. risk decreasing • Involuntary vs. voluntary • Affects me vs. doesn’t affect me • Not preventable vs. preventable Session 11

8. Factors Related to How Much is Known About the Risk • Not observable vs. observable • Unknown to those exposed vs. known to those exposed • Effect delayed vs. effect immediate • New risk vs. old risk • Risks unknown to science vs. risks known to science Session 11

9. Risk Fallibility Conclusion 4 • Disagreements about risk should not be expected to evaporate in the presence of “evidence.” • People often are unaware of how little they know about a risk, and of how much more information they need to make an informed decision. Session 11

10. Risk Perception Attributes • Socioeconomic characteristics • People’s knowledge of the environment and the hazards that the environment poses to them • Their ignorance • Their ability to cope with those hazards. • Their ability to access help from outside. Session 11

11. Risk Perception Influence on Mitigation • If those funding HazMit projects do not perceive the hazard to be significant, funding is unlikely to be provided • If the public does not perceive a hazard to affect them personally, they are unlikely to take any personal measures to prepare or mitigate • The presence of differing risk perceptions highlights the need for effective risk communication Session 11