Risk, fear, blame, shame and the regulation of public safety

Economics and Philosophy 22 (3):409-427 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The question of when people may impose risks on each other is of fundamental moral importance. Forms of “quantified risk assessment,” especially risk cost-benefit analysis, provide one powerful approach to providing a systematic answer. It is also well known that such techniques can show that existing resources could be used more effectively to reduce risk overall. Thus it is often argued that some current practices are irrational. On the other hand critics of quantified risk assessment argue that it cannot adequately capture all relevant features, such as “societal concern” and so should be abandoned. In this paper I argue that current forms of quantified risk assessment are inadequate, and in themselves, therefore, insufficient to demonstrate that current practices are irrational. In particular, I will argue that insufficient attention has been given to the cause of a hazard, which needs to be treated as a primary variable in its own right. However rather than reject quantified risk assessment I wish to supplement it by proposing a framework to make explicit the role causation plays in the understanding of risk, and how it interacts with factors which influence perception of risks and other attitudes to risk control. Once an improved description of risk perception is available it will become possible to have a more informed debate about the normative question: how safety should be regulated



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Safety and decision-making.Niklas Möller - 2006 - Dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
Quantification, Regulation, and Risk Assessment.Douglas MacLean - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:243 - 260.
Risk-Based Sentencing and Predictive Accuracy.Jesper Ryberg - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23 (1):251-263.
Can informed consent to research be adapted to risk?Danielle Bromwich & Annette Rid - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (7):521-528.
The Concept of Risk: Risk Assessment and Nuclear Safety.Paul Banks Thompson - 1980 - Dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook
Applying the notion of epistemic risk to argumentation in philosophy of science.Jaana Eigi-Watkin - 2022 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 12 (2):1-18.


Added to PP

144 (#131,616)

6 months
35 (#118,064)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jonathan Wolff
Oxford University

References found in this work

Risk.John Adams - 1996 - Environmental Values 5 (2):181-182.
Justice and the Distribution of Fear.Keith Burgess-Jackson - 1994 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 32 (4):367-391.

Add more references