Can Risk Analysis+ Ethics = Improved Public Policy? Orlo Ehart, Next Wave Enterprises, 25 Heather Lane, Belle Mead, NJ 08502-5125
Ethical choices, like public policy choices, can be clouded by agendas, biases, greed, power and, once in the open, spin, political correctness and a cynical media. This paper draws heavily from Rushworth Kidder’s views of ethics, spiced with examples of dilemmas that risk professionals face when dealing with public policy issues. Choosing between right and wrong is not an ethical dilemma, unless pursuing a purposeful course of civil disobedience; we can only ethically choose right. Dilemmas may exist when choosing between two right choices. While it is often easier and more fun to judge others, the toughest choices are those we have to make ourselves, often without benefit of 20/20 hindsight. One right choice may seem apparent in the following examples; however, depending upon circumstances, ethical dilemmas may exist. (1) If our data are misportrayed, do risk assessors openly demand truth? Is the answer the same if our "client" is industry? Or government? Or the misportrayal is by the media rather than from our "client"? Are there times when loyalty to an employer is justified, e. g., are differences of opinion a result of interpretation, uncertainty or bias? (2) Some risk policies support the greatest good for the greatest number of people while others support protection of environment over people or subpopulations over total populations. What are the ethical dilemmas in choosing these options? In a policy sense, risk analysis is sometimes used to justify a "right" answer; will the same "right" answer result if different questions were asked? Whose responsibility is it to determine the right questions? If it is not in our job description or contract are we, as risk professionals, removed from ethical responsibility? (3) Risk assessors and managers tend to err on the side of caution, reasoning that it is the ethical choice; but is it still ethical if our assumptions are wrong? Or if we never choose to test them? (4) If someone has been unethical, should we always seek justice? Are there instances where it is more appropriate to be merciful? (5) Is the recognition of the potential consequences of our actions necessary in order to make ethical choices? (6) Are long-term decisions always justified over short-term ones? (7) Is there any degree of uncertainty that should prompt a risk manager to conclude: we do not know enough to make an ethical decision? What ethical dilemmas does a risk communicator face in this instance? Answers may not always be clear-cut, consistent or without agony and peril; however, when risk professionals ask and seek answers to these and other questions the public can be better served.