IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v22y2002i1p101-120.html

An Existential Approach to Risk Perception

Author

Listed:
  • Ian H. Langford

Abstract

Existential, or existential‐phenomenological philosophical approaches to the social psychology of risk perception provide a novel framework for understanding issues that are common to all humanity, such as fear of death, freedom and responsibility, isolation and meaninglessness, as these anxieties are a function of existing, or being‐in‐the‐world. These fundamental anxieties can be related theoretically to the ways people perceive risks within social and cultural milieus, and can also be used practically within case studies, as demonstrated in the three examples presented, which examine perceptions of climate change, food‐related risks, and environmental awareness via a mixture of quantitative and qualitative techniques. The discussion focuses on the possible insights that can be gained from taking an existential perspective on risk perception, and relates notions of contemporary technologically‐oriented societies to the existential challenges faced by individuals and societies in the contemporary world.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian H. Langford, 2002. "An Existential Approach to Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 101-120, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:1:p:101-120
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00009
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Slovic, 1993. "Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(6), pages 675-682, December.
    2. Claire Marris & Ian H. Langford & Timothy O'Riordan, 1998. "A Quantitative Test of the Cultural Theory of Risk Perceptions: Comparison with the Psychometric Paradigm," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 635-647, October.
    3. S Georgiou & I H Langford & I J Bateman & R K Turner, 1998. "Determinants of Individuals' Willingness to Pay for Perceived Reductions in Environmental Health Risks: A Case Study of Bathing Water Quality," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 30(4), pages 577-594, April.
    4. Daniel Read & Ann Bostrom & M. Granger Morgan & Baruch Fischhoff & Tom Smuts, 1994. "What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? 2. Survey Studies of Educated Laypeople," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 971-982, December.
    5. Kontogianni, Areti & Skourtos, Mihalis S. & Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J. & Georgiou, Stavros, 2001. "Integrating stakeholder analysis in non-market valuation of environmental assets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 123-138, April.
    6. Paul Sparks & Richard Shepherd, 1994. "Public Perceptions of the Potential Hazards Associated with Food Production and Food Consumption: An Empirical Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 799-806, October.
    7. Ann Bostrom & M. Granger Morgan & Baruch Fischhoff & Daniel Read, 1994. "What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? 1. Mental Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 959-970, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    2. Jacqueline CK Lam & Victor OK Li & David M. Reiner & Yang Han & Shan Shan Wang, 2018. "Trust in Government and Effective Nuclear Safety Governance in Great Britain," Working Papers EPRG 1811, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    3. Gabriele Prati & Luca Pietrantoni & Cinzia Albanesi, 2018. "Human values and beliefs and concern about climate change: a Bayesian longitudinal analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1613-1625, July.
    4. Hyland, John J. & Heanue, Kevin & McKillop, Jessica & Micha, Evgenia, 2018. "Factors underlying farmers' intentions to adopt best practices: The case of paddock based grazing systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 97-106.
    5. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2005. "Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1), pages 199-209, February.
    6. Jia, Ling & Qian, Queena K. & Meijer, Frits & Visscher, Henk, 2021. "How information stimulates homeowners’ cooperation in residential building energy retrofits in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Jin-Li Hu & Po-Sheng Yang, 2024. "Interactive Cycles between Energy Education and Energy Preferences: A Literature Review on Empirical Evidence," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-31, October.
    8. Ante Ivčević & Isabel Estrela Rego & Rui Gaspar & Vania Statzu, 2021. "Telluric and Climate-Related Risk Awareness, and Risk Mitigation Strategies in the Azores Archipelago: First Steps for Building Societal Resilience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-11, August.
    9. Yan Jingwen & Azmawani Abd Rahman & Tong Tong, 2022. "Research on the Impact of BMI on Enterprise Performance Based on the Antecedence of Risk Perception," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Wenyan Wu & Lu Li & Hanxin Chen & Minyue Xu & Yalin Yuan, 2022. "Farmers’ Preference for Participating in Rural Solid Waste Management: A Case Study from Shaanxi Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-14, November.
    11. Andreas Y. Troumbis, 2024. "Did the COVID-19 Crisis Reframe Public Awareness of Environmental Topics as Humanity’s Existential Risks? A Case from the UK," World, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah E. Hampson & Judy A. Andrews & Michael E. Lee & Lyn S. Foster & Russell E. Glasgow & Edward Liechtenstein, 1998. "Lay Understanding of Synergistic Risk: The Case of Radon and Cigarette Smoking," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 343-350, June.
    2. Rebecca E. Morss & Julie L. Demuth & Ann Bostrom & Jeffrey K. Lazo & Heather Lazrus, 2015. "Flash Flood Risks and Warning Decisions: A Mental Models Study of Forecasters, Public Officials, and Media Broadcasters in Boulder, Colorado," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(11), pages 2009-2028, November.
    3. Paul M. Kellstedt & Sammy Zahran & Arnold Vedlitz, 2008. "Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 113-126, February.
    4. Matthew D. Wood & Ann Bostrom & Todd Bridges & Igor Linkov, 2012. "Cognitive Mapping Tools: Review and Risk Management Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1333-1348, August.
    5. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    6. Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman, 2019. "Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 805-828, April.
    7. Matthew Wood & Daniel Kovacs & Ann Bostrom & Todd Bridges & Igor Linkov, 2012. "Flood Risk Management: US Army Corps of Engineers and Layperson Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1349-1368, August.
    8. Thomas F. Thornton & Diana Mangalagiu & Yuge Ma & Jing Lan & Mahir Yazar & Ali Kerem Saysel & Abdel Maoula Chaar, 2020. "Cultural models of and for urban sustainability: assessing beliefs about Green-Win," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 521-537, June.
    9. Raya Muttarak & Thanyaporn Chankrajang, 2015. "Who is concerned about and takes action on climate change? Gender and education divides among Thais," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 13(1), pages 193-220.
    10. Peter Taylor‐Gooby & Jens O. Zinn, 2006. "Current Directions in Risk Research: New Developments in Psychology and Sociology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 397-411, April.
    11. Katherine M. Crosman & Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes, 2019. "Efficacy Foundations for Risk Communication: How People Think About Reducing the Risks of Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2329-2347, October.
    12. Joanna Burger & Kerry Kirk Pflugh & Lynette Lurig & Leigh Ann Von Hagen & Stanley Von Hagen, 1999. "Fishing in Urban New Jersey: Ethnicity Affects Information Sources, Pe ception, and Compliance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 217-229, April.
    13. Sondoss ElSawah & Alan McLucas & Jason Mazanov, 2015. "Communicating About Water Issues in Australia," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(6), pages 713-741, December.
    14. Rachael Dempsey & Ann Fisher, 2005. "Consortium for Atlantic Regional Assessment: Information Tools for Community Adaptation to Changes in Climate or Land Use," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1495-1509, December.
    15. Ariel Malka & Jon A. Krosnick & Gary Langer, 2009. "The Association of Knowledge with Concern About Global Warming: Trusted Information Sources Shape Public Thinking," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 633-647, May.
    16. Hayam Elshirbiny & Wokje Abrahamse, 2020. "Public risk perception of climate change in Egypt: a mixed methods study of predictors and implications," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(3), pages 242-254, September.
    17. A. Skarlatidou & T. Cheng & M. Haklay, 2012. "What Do Lay People Want to Know About the Disposal of Nuclear Waste? A Mental Model Approach to the Design and Development of an Online Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1496-1511, September.
    18. Julie C. Libarkin & Anne U. Gold & Sara E. Harris & Karen S. McNeal & Ryan P. Bowles, 2018. "A new, valid measure of climate change understanding: associations with risk perception," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 403-416, October.
    19. Bahman Huseynli, 2024. "Gamification in Energy Consumption: A Model for Consumers’ Energy Saving," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 14(1), pages 312-320, January.
    20. Lucia Savadori & Stefania Savio & Eraldo Nicotra & Rino Rumiati & Melissa Finucane & Paul Slovic, 2004. "Expert and Public Perception of Risk from Biotechnology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1289-1299, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:1:p:101-120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.