Interesting points:
Theme of tension and conflict of interest between the "institution" who are our supposed "experts" and individuals that are targeted by the risk management process as well as those other individuals that are stakeholders in the process. The job or role of risk manager/ risk analyser has become a difficult role. These does generally well paid, with constant conflict of interest between institutions and environmental/ political goals. Somewhat a glamour role " witch hunting", this role is created to deal with sometime perceived risks. How much does our fear and ignorance lead to inefficient allocation of resources towards this field? How much can we actually achieve in preventing the results of a "bad risk" when uncertainty exists?
Your comment is really interesting Rebecca.
ReplyDeleteYou asked how much does our fear and ignorance lead to inefficient allocation of resources towards this field? I believe our fear has a huge role to play. We are ruled by our fears, and cannot create an independence from them. I agree with you that this must lead to an inefficient allocation of resources. Just look at the drug development field. Some drugs are going through extensive pre-release testing which is completely a waste of time, as the testing cannot detect the hazards anyway.
As to your second question, how much can we actually achieve in preventing the results of a "bad risk" when uncertainty exists? I think Clark was suggesting that we should work with what we know and go from there. What we know is that risks are going to happen, what we have power to change is how we deal with the risks when they do occur. I.e. the systems we have in place with coping. We should not focus on “controlling” the risk, we should focus on systems to aid coping and perhaps even learning from our actions retrospectively to help limit the negative effects of risks in the future.