TITLE:
Are Misunderstandings over “Risk” Contributing to Difficulties in Assessing and Managing Safety in the Public Domain?
AUTHORS:
Laurence N. Ball-King
KEYWORDS:
Risk, Safety, Management, Public Services, Contradictions, Ambiguities, UK
JOURNAL NAME:
Journal of Service Science and Management,
Vol.15 No.5,
October
9,
2022
ABSTRACT: Since 1974 the public sector in the United Kingdom has
been required to assess and manage risk as a means of safeguarding its
employees and the public. While this risk-based approach still enjoys
high-level support, the process of assessing and managing risk has been
reported as giving rise to technical difficulties. Of note is that in 1983 it
was stated in a Royal Society of London study group report that it may be
seriously misleading to multiply the estimated severity of a risk by its
probability as a process for comparing and thus prioritising hazards. However,
influenced by developments in occupational safety, it has become common to
express “risk” as some function of likelihood and
severity of consequence. This article investigates whether this definitional matter is in any way problematic within the public sphere by application of an
inductive, qualitative methodology entailing in-depth interview with
thirty-four UK risk experts whose transcripts were subjected to thematic
analysis. This was triangulated against document analysis and observation of
the written and spoken word at conferences, training sessions and in the
contested environment of the courtroom. An emergent theme amongst the
experts is that while the risk-based approach to safety management continues to
be strongly supported, there remain fundamental definitional issues over the
way the term “risk” is used, and this is leading to confusion, uncertainty and
inconsistencies. Evidence of similar definitional issues can be observed in documents,
educational literature, and also manifests itself in UK courtrooms. It is
concluded that the risk-based approach to safety assessment and regulation is
hampered by foundational issues linked to societal understanding of “risk.”