Benefit-risk assessment: balancing the benefits and risks of leisure

Figures & data

Figure 1. This shows an obvious risk of death or serious injury through falling onto the track as there is no track-side barrier. The trade-off in this case is between the risk of injury and the cost and difficulty of control.

Figure 2. The footpath along the Beachy Head cliffs is mostly unfenced despite a drop rising to over 150 m. The trade-off here is between the risk of falling and the desire to preserve an attraction in its natural state.

Table 1. Comparison of B-RA and CBA.

B-RA	CBA
Benefits of activity or place (e.g. physical exercise, psychological and social benefits, access to nature or historic environment etc.) versus Risk of being harmed (e.g. injury)	Benefits of treatment or safety intervention (e.g. better health, reduced risk of harm) versus Costs of measure

Table 2. Examples of a compensatory and non-compensatory decision.

Compensatory strategy	Non-compensatory strategy
“I will purchase the bicycle that comes out best when I balance all the good attributes against the bad.”	“I will purchase the bicycle that is cheapest*, irrespective of other attributes.” *or fastest, lightest, safest etc.

Figure 3. Margolis’ categorization of decisions which recognize or not (a) danger of harm and (b) opportunity costs of controlling the harm (Margolis, 1996).

Margolis, H. (1996). Dealing with risk: Why the public and the experts disagree on environmental issues. University of Chicago Press.

 Google Scholar