IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i1p16-24.html

Defending the Conception of “Objective Risk”

Author

Listed:
  • Helene Hermansson

Abstract

The notion of “objective risk” is frequently discussed within the risk literature. While some argue that risk analysis measures objective risk, others claim that there are no real, objective risks—only subjective descriptions of them. “Objectivity” in these discussions often presupposes value‐free, dispassionate, and impartial analysis. Feminist epistemology offers a different interpretation of “objectivity” that is more context‐bound. It is argued that even though every risk can be described in several different ways, and does involve value judgments and emotions, the objectivity ideal should not be abandoned.

Suggested Citation

  • Helene Hermansson, 2012. "Defending the Conception of “Objective Risk”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 16-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:1:p:16-24
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01682.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01682.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01682.x?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. Sheila Jasanoff, 1993. "Bridging the Two Cultures of Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 123-129, April.
    2. Scott Campbell & Ellen Townsend, 2003. "Flaws undermine results of UK biotech debate," Nature, Nature, vol. 425(6958), pages 559-559, October.
    3. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2009. "On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, January.
    4. Jamie K. Wardman, 2008. "The Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1619-1637, December.
    5. Ragnar E. Löfstedt & Saburo Ikeda & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2000. "Risk Management across the Globe: Insights from a Comparative Look at Sweden, Japan, and the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 157-162, April.
    6. Ralph L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1991. "A Prescriptive Risk Framework for Individual Health and Safety Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(3), pages 523-533, September.
    7. Sandra Harding, 1995. "Can feminist thought make economics more objective?," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 7-32.
    8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    9. Hahn, Robert W. (ed.), 1996. "Risks, Costs, and Lives Saved: Getting Better Results from Regulation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195211740.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim, 2007. "Preferences and decision errors in the winner’s curse," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 241-257, June.
    3. Alday, Sandra Seno, 2022. "Regional integration and the regional risk paradox," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 793-808.
    4. Joshua M. Epstein, 2007. "Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science," Introductory Chapters, in: Generative Social Science Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling, Princeton University Press.
    5. Liebig, Stefan & Schupp, Jürgen, 2008. "Leistungs- oder Bedarfsgerechtigkeit? Über einen normativen Zielkonflikt des Wohlfahrtsstaats und seiner Bedeutung für die Bewertung des eigenen Erwerbseinkommens," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(1), pages 7-30.
    6. Buckenmaier, Johannes & Dimant, Eugen & Posten, Ann-Christin & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2017. "On punishment institutions and effective deterrence of illicit behavior," Kiel Working Papers 2090, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    7. Dengsheng Wu & Xiaoqian Zhu & Jie Wan & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li, 2019. "A Multiobjective Optimization Approach for Selecting Risk Response Strategies of Software Project: From the Perspective of Risk Correlations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 339-364, January.
    8. Jérôme Massiani, 2023. "Economic Expertise and Large Infrastructures Projects: The 2019 Cost Benefit Analysis of the Lyon Turin Project [Expertise économique et grandes infrastructures : l’analyse coûts- avantages du Lyon-Turin de 2019]," Post-Print hal-04159527, HAL.
    9. Ashton, John K. & Hudson, Robert S., 2008. "Interest rate clustering in UK financial services markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1393-1403, July.
    10. John Davis, 1996. "Value-ladenness in economics: reply to Rosenbaum," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 121-125.
    11. Aven, Terje, 2010. "Some reflections on uncertainty analysis and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 195-201.
    12. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    13. Neelke Doorn, 2015. "The Blind Spot in Risk Ethics: Managing Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 354-360, March.
    14. Hyungju Kim & Mary Ann Lundteigen & Andreas Hafver & Frank Børre Pedersen, 2021. "Utilization of risk priority number to systems-theoretic process analysis: A practical solution to manage a large number of unsafe control actions and loss scenarios," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 235(1), pages 92-107, February.
    15. Bindewald, Eckart, 2017. "A survey suggests individual priorities are virtually unique: Implications for group dynamics, goal achievement and ecology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 362(C), pages 69-79.
    16. Cheng Li, 2019. "Morality and value neutrality in economics: a dualist view," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 97-118, May.
    17. Åsa Lofgren & Katarina Nordblom, 2009. "Puzzling tax attitudes and labels," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(18), pages 1809-1812.
    18. Bruce N. Ames & Lois Swirsky Gold & Mark K. Shigenaga, 1996. "Cancer Prevention, Rodent High‐Dose Cancer Tests, and Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(5), pages 613-617, October.
    19. Yuval Arbel & Danny Ben-Shahar & Eyal Sulganik, 2009. "Mean Reversion and Momentum: Another Look at the Price-Volume Correlation in the Real Estate Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 316-335, October.
    20. Rania HENTATI & Jean-Luc PRIGENT, 2010. "Structured Portfolio Analysis under SharpeOmega Ratio," EcoMod2010 259600073, EcoMod.

    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:32:y:2012:i:1:p:16-24. 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.