Managing uncertainty: psychological issues are critical for risk policy

Abstract

The target article ‘Risk analysis, uncertainty and innovation: what does this mean for the Dutch energy transition?’ advocates dropping use of the precautionary principle, proposing an alternative Tolerability of Risk (ToR) approach to foster both protection and innovation in the face of uncertain risks. Inclusion of stakeholder views and values is a key feature of ToR with fundamental appeal. However the status of public perceptions of risk is contentious. Evaluating and integrating potentially conflicting views into regulatory policy presents significant challenges.

Keywords:

• Precautionary principle
• cultural cognition
• cognitive biases
• risk perceptions
• stakeholder engagement

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 Note that Sunstein does see certain qualified uses of the precautionary idea as entirely uncontroversial. Thus: “ … refinements of the precautionary principle make sense, including the control of potentially catastrophic harms whose probability cannot be assessed with any confidence. Hence an Anti-Catastrophe Principle deserves public endorsement.” (Sunstein 2005, p. 15).

2 On finding that they could not reduce its ambiguity without sacrificing its plausibility, Turner and Hartzell (2004) concluded that the plausibility of the precautionary principle may actually depend on its vagueness.