Report by the National Academy of Sciences' National
Research Council, 1996.
Description of report by Amy Charlene
Reed, RiskWorld staff.
E-mail to: reed@tec-com.com
Last updated on July 20, 1996.
A major report recently released by the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council
sweepingly redefines the characterization of risk with the ultimate goal of
increasing stakeholders' acceptance of risk assessments.
Prepared by the council's Committee on Risk Characterization, the report Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society urges risk assessors to expand risk characterization beyond the current practice of merely translating the results of a risk analysis into nontechnical terms. This limited approach is "seriously deficient" and should be replaced with an analytical-deliberative approach that involves stakeholders from the very inception of a risk assessment, the report advocates.
The report was edited by committee Chair Harvey V. Fineberg, dean of Harvard University's School of Public Health, and by National Research Council staff member Paul C. Stern. It is available in hard copy from the National Academy Press for $39.95 plus shipping charges of $4 for single copies and 50 cents for additional copies. To order by telephone, call (202) 334-3313 or (800) 624-6242; to order electronically, visit the National Academy Press' World Wide Web site or go directly to the specific order form.
For more information, see RiskWorld's news story.
Selected definitions from the report's glossary:
Interested parties. People, groups, or organizations that decide to become informed about and involved in a risk characterization or decision-making process. Interested parties may or may not also be affected parties. Affected parties. People, groups, or organizations that may experience benefit or harm as a result of a hazard, or of the process leading to risk characterization, or of a decision about risk. They need not be aware of the possible harm to be considered affected.
Risk. A concept used to give meaning to things, forces, or circumstances that pose danger to people or to what they value. Descriptions of risk are typically stated in terms of the likelihood of harm or loss from a hazard and usually include: an identification of what is "at risk" and may be harmed or lost (e.g. health of human beings or an ecosystem, personal property, quality of life, ability to carry on an economic activity); the hazard that may occasion this loss; and a judgment about likelihood that harm will occur.
Risk analysis. The application of methods of analysis to matters of risk. Its aim is to increase understanding of the substantive qualities, seriousness, likelihood, and conditions of a hazard or risk and of the options for managing it. Although risk analysis is sometimes conceived to be relevant only to gathering, interpreting, and summarizing information about certain possible consequences of a hazard, analysis has other uses in risk characterization.
Risk characterization. A synthesis and
summary of information about a hazard that addresses the needs
and interests of decision makers and of interested and affected
parties. Risk characterization is a prelude to decision making
and depends on an iterative, analytic-deliberative process.
*Reprinted with permission from Understanding
Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society.
Copyright 1996 by the National Academy of Sciences. The complete
book is available from the National Academy Press, 2101
Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055 (call
toll-free (800) 624-6242). See also order information.
"Risk characterization" is a complex and often
controversial activity that is both a product of analysis and
dependent on the processes of defining and conducting analysis.
The study committee will assess opportunities to improve the
characterization of risk so as to better inform decision making
and resolution of controversies over risk. The study will
address: technical issues such as the representation of
uncertainty; issues relating to translating the outputs of
conventional risk analysis into non-technical language; and
social, behavioral, economic, and ethical aspects of risk that
are relevant to the content or process of risk characterization.
*Reprinted with permission from Understanding
Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society.
Copyright 1996 by the National Academy of Sciences. The complete
book is available from the National Academy Press, 2101
Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055 (call
toll-free (800) 624-6242). See also order information.
1. Risk characterization should be a decision-driven activity, directed toward informing choices and solving problems.
2. Coping with a risk situation requires a broad understanding of the relevant losses, harms, or consequences to the interested and affected parties.
3. Risk characterization is the outcome of an analytic-deliberative process.
4. The analytic-deliberative process leading to a risk characterization should include early and explicit attention to problem formulation; representation of the spectrum of interested and affected parties at this early stage is imperative.
5. The analytic-deliberative process should be mutual and recursive. Analysis and deliberation are complementary and must be integrated throughout the process leading to risk characterization: deliberation frames analysis, analysis informs deliberation, and the process benefits from feedback between the two.
The structure of an analytic-deliberative process depends on the particular situation, but five objectives can be identified:
Getting the science right.
Getting the right science.
Getting the right participation.
Getting the participation right.
Developing an accurate, balanced, and informative synthesis.
6. Those responsible for a risk characterization should begin by developing a provisional diagnosis of the decision situation so that they can better match the analytic-deliberative process leading to the characterization to the needs of the decision, particularly in terms of level and intensity of effort and representation of parties. The report recommends eight steps in this process:
a. diagnose the kind of risk and the state of knowledge
b. describe the legal mandate
c. describe the purpose of the risk decision
d. describe the affected parties and anticipate public reactions
e. estimate resource needs and timetable
f. plan for organizational needs
g. develop a preliminary process design
h. summarize and discuss the diagnosis within the responsible
organization
7. Each organization responsible for making risk decisions
should work to build organizational capability to conform to the
principles of sound risk characterization. At a minimum, it
should pay attention to organizational changes and staff training
efforts that might be required, to ways of improving practice by
learning from experience, and to both costs and benefits in terms
of the organization's mission and budget.
*Reprinted with permission from Understanding
Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society.
Copyright 1996 by the National Academy of Sciences. The complete
book is available from the National Academy Press, 2101
Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055 (call
toll-free (800) 624-6242). See also order information.
Harvey V. Fineberg (chair)
Dean
Harvard School of Public Health
Boston, Massachusetts
John Ahearne
Director
Sigma Xi Center, Scientific Research Society, and
Lecturer, Sanford Institute of Public Policy
Duke University
Durham, North Carolina
Thomas A. Burke
Associate Professor of Health Policy and Management, and
Co-director, Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute
School of Hygiene and Public Health
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland
Caron Chess
Director, Center for Environmental Communication
Rutgers University
New Brunswick, New Jersey
Brenda S. Davis
Vice President of Government Operations and member of the
Management Board
Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems Inc.
Piscataway, New Jersey
Peter L. Defur
Affiliate Associate Professor
Center for Environmental Studies
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, Virginia
Jeffrey Harris
Primary-Care Internist
Massachusetts General Hospital, and
Professor of Economics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Mark A. Harwell
Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Analyses
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
Miami, Florida
Sheila Jasanoff
Professor of Science Policy and Law, and
Chair, Department of Science and Technology Studies
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York
James C. Lamb IV
Vice President, Scientific and Technical Services
Jellinek, Schwartz and Connolly Inc.
Washington, D.C.
D. Warner North
Senior Vice President
Decision Focus Inc.
Mountain View, California, and
Consulting Professor, Department of Engineering-Economic Systems
Stanford University
Palo Alto, California
Kristin Shrader-Frechete
Distinguished Research Professor
Program in Environmental Sciences and Policy and Department of
Philosophy
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida
Paul Slovic
President
Decision Research, and
Professor of Psychology
University of Oregon
Eugene, Oregon
Mitchell J. Small
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and of
Engineering and Public Policy
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Elaine Vaughan
Associate Professor of Psychology
School of Social Ecology
University of California
Irvine, California
James D. Wilson
Senior Fellow and Leader of the Risk Analysis Program
Center for Risk Management
Resources for the Future
Washington, D.C.
Lauren Zeise
Chief of Reproductive and Cancer Hazard Assessment
California Environmental Protection Agency
Berkeley, California
Research Council Staff:
Paul C. Stern, Study Director, e-mail: pstern@nas.edu
Sarah Connick, Senior Staff Officer
Thomas Webler, Consultant
Mary E. Thomas, Senior Program Associate
Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic
Society is available in hard copy from the National Academy
Press for $39.95 plus shipping charges of $4 for single copies
and 50 cents for additional copies. To order the report
electronically, visit the National
Academy Press' World Wide Web site or go directly to its specific
order form for this report; to order by telephone, call (202)
334-3313 or (800) 624-6242.