Epidemiology and social risk amplification

Lead Research Organisation: Lancaster University
Department Name: Management Science

Abstract

The predominant activity in risk assessment is the modelling of physical hazards. Yet recent major risk events, such as the Sudan 1 food contamination scandal, show how important the social response can be in comparison to physical harm. Withdrawals of product, loss of reputation, reductions in trust, additional testing and inspection regimes, and so on can often be just as consequential as physical injury. Our main basis for understanding the social response to risk events is the Social Amplification of Risk Framework due to Kasperson et al (1988). But this remains a qualitative model, and is accepted even by its authors (for example Kasperson et al 2003) as a 'framework' for organising our general understanding rather than a theory that will predict or explain the social construction of risk in a definite way.Our aim is to determine whether, and investigate how, we can make the concepts which appear in social risk amplification models more precise and more quantitative. To do this we propose to explore a variety of techniques used in the discipline of epidemiology - on the basis of a number of apparent parallels. For example, notions of susceptibility and infection seem to be analogous to notions of sensitivity and concern, 'super-infectives' resemble certain social institutions such as the broadcast media, and the recrudescence of infection resembles the recrudescence of concern and 'ripple effects' found in risk amplification. The programme will involve applying a number of techniques to the various kinds of data we have about social response (for example the uptake of vaccinations), in the context of several recent case studies. We plan to assess how informative these are in the decision processes of our collaborator - the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.
 
Description There were two main contributions from the project. The first was the set of findings from the fieldwork (a set of interviews and focus groups). This showed how important social risk amplification was as an attribution, rather than an objective measure. It showed how such attributions could be categorised and what the implications were for a society trying to deal with a risk like a zoonotic disease outbreak. The second was a systems dynamics model. This showed how the principle of social risk amplification as an attribution led to a much stronger polarisation of risk beliefs between different groups. It suggested how risk managers (for example regulatory bodies) needed to take account of how other actors might believe they were exaggerating or underplaying a risk.
Exploitation Route Our publications suggest some implications for risk communication policy. In particular, they point to the problems of situations where people lack first-hand knowledge of a risk, so develop their risk responses as responses to other people's risk responses. A knowledge of how and why they believe those other people to be risk amplifiers or attenuators then becomes important. The main potential exploitation routes would be to use these findings in risk communication policies within risk managing organizations, and to further develop the modelling into more sophisticated forms that can take better account of heterogeneity of beliefs.
Sectors Agriculture

Food and Drink

Environment

Other

 
Description AIR Liquide (France) 
Organisation Air Liquide
Country Global 
Sector Private 
Start Year 2007