Denise Caruso
October 2002
[pdf]

ABSTRACT
The growth of scientific knowledge and the technological advancements of the past several hundred years have provided the catalyst for civilization and grist for ongoing, fundamental changes to social, political and economic systems around the globe. If one were inclined to reduce to first principles, a good case could be made that such advances have been possible only because humans have developed increasingly sophisticated ways of understanding and dealing successfully with risk.

Until roughly the 1970s, the field of risk was largely dominated by engineers, economists and epidemiologists, who calculated risk based on historical data and knowledge of existing systems and vectors. But over the past 30 years, exponential increases in both the volume of advancements in science and technology and the velocity at which they have been introduced into practical use have fueled an ongoing debate about the risks these advancements engender–how the risks are assessed, and how they are managed (and by whom)–in an increasingly interdependent world.

The central issue, as seen by a wide range of concerned scientists, public policy makers, citizens and other stakeholders, is the difficulty of accurately assessing risks, given the sparseness and uncertainty of scientific knowledge about most new discoveries and technologies. These uncertainties have highlighted the shortcomings of purely quantitative assessment measures and, over the past two decades, prompted a growing acknowledgment by risk experts (in theory, if not yet in widespread practice) of the co-equal importance of subjective factors, including values, for understanding risk.

Risk is a fundamental concern that is constantly under investigation in virtually all aspects of civilized life. For the past 20 years, an extraordinary number of disciplines have undertaken the study of risk — beyond engineers and economists, now psychologists, social scientists, lawyers, biologists, physicians, operations researchers and others have entered the scene. This paper attempts to address and synthesize only a fraction of this vast literature.

First, we will sketch an historical landscape of risk in the broadest strokes. We will then briefly note the most pivotal of the various mathematical tools and approaches that have been developed and/or used in the quantitative assessment of risk.

Then we will segue into an exploration of the schools of thought which, over the past 20 years, have increasingly informed the study of risk. Rather than focusing on the latest permutations of mathematical theories of probability, or the relatively straightforward studies of economics and actuarials which have until now effectively employed these theories, this section will focus–more usefully, we expect–on the evolution of risk analysis beyond purely qualitative, probabilistic approaches into the realm of values and subjectivity, specifically where such analysis concerns the intersection of science, technology and public policy.

The paper will close with a brief note about risk studies outside of the United States, some relevant case studies of specific risk analyses and a bibliography to facilitate further, independent investigation.

The author would like to thank Baruch Fischhoff of Carnegie Mellon University for his generous contribution of time and thoughtfulness to this paper. His wealth of publications, expertise and extensive knowledge of a broad field was of incalculable value as a navigation aid through the “vasty deep” of the literature of risk and the many people who populate its waters. Any misinterpretations are solely the author’s.