Pub Date : 2023-05-19DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208134
Meng Yuan, Yan Yang, Hongtao Yi
Abstract Understanding public debates on environmental problems is critical for enhancing the effectiveness and social acceptance of environmental policies. This article aims to understand how factual environmental condition and culture influence the perceived severity of environmental problems in China. Relying on Cultural Theory and Cultural Cognitive Theory, we measure grid with an egalitarianism-hierarchy scale and group with an individualism–communitarianism scale. We use a large scale nationwide representative survey data——the Chinese General Social Survey——to identify Chinese political subcultures and find that environmental condition alone rarely play a role in Chinese environmental perceptions, and that as hypothesized, moving from egalitarianism to hierarchy, people perceive six of eight environmental problems to be less severe, whereas moving from individualism to communitarianism, people perceive five of eight environmental problems to be more severe. Meanwhile, the effect of environmental condition on the relationship between cultural worldview and perceived severity is very limited. This study has implications for environmental communication.
{"title":"Environmental condition, cultural worldview, and environmental perceptions in China","authors":"Meng Yuan, Yan Yang, Hongtao Yi","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208134","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Understanding public debates on environmental problems is critical for enhancing the effectiveness and social acceptance of environmental policies. This article aims to understand how factual environmental condition and culture influence the perceived severity of environmental problems in China. Relying on Cultural Theory and Cultural Cognitive Theory, we measure grid with an egalitarianism-hierarchy scale and group with an individualism–communitarianism scale. We use a large scale nationwide representative survey data——the Chinese General Social Survey——to identify Chinese political subcultures and find that environmental condition alone rarely play a role in Chinese environmental perceptions, and that as hypothesized, moving from egalitarianism to hierarchy, people perceive six of eight environmental problems to be less severe, whereas moving from individualism to communitarianism, people perceive five of eight environmental problems to be more severe. Meanwhile, the effect of environmental condition on the relationship between cultural worldview and perceived severity is very limited. This study has implications for environmental communication.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43974965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-18DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615
L. Dendler, Mariana Morais, Jan Nikolas Hargart, J. Lourenço, Domagoj Vrbos, Paul Ortega, Kamila Sfugier Tollik, Georgios Alaveras, B. Gallani, Michelle Patel, Laura Broomfield, Ortwin Renn
Abstract Considering growing participatory turns in regulatory scientific risk analysis, this paper compares how social scientists use participatory and analytical methods to understand risk perceptions and meet competing demands for representativeness and inclusiveness. Drawing on case studies of how three European risk agencies use participatory and analytic methods in the context of biotechnology, it confirms difficulties of analytic methods to shed light on perceptions when applied to unfamiliar topics. It also shows the potential of participatory in particular deliberative formats to engage affected populations in the risk analysis process, despite challenges in promoting inclusiveness. The cases call for the integration of methods, while remaining aware of the need to understand the mutual interplay in the constructions of risks and structural inequalities.
{"title":"Participatory versus analytic approaches for understanding risk perceptions: a comparison of three case studies from the field of biotechnology","authors":"L. Dendler, Mariana Morais, Jan Nikolas Hargart, J. Lourenço, Domagoj Vrbos, Paul Ortega, Kamila Sfugier Tollik, Georgios Alaveras, B. Gallani, Michelle Patel, Laura Broomfield, Ortwin Renn","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Considering growing participatory turns in regulatory scientific risk analysis, this paper compares how social scientists use participatory and analytical methods to understand risk perceptions and meet competing demands for representativeness and inclusiveness. Drawing on case studies of how three European risk agencies use participatory and analytic methods in the context of biotechnology, it confirms difficulties of analytic methods to shed light on perceptions when applied to unfamiliar topics. It also shows the potential of participatory in particular deliberative formats to engage affected populations in the risk analysis process, despite challenges in promoting inclusiveness. The cases call for the integration of methods, while remaining aware of the need to understand the mutual interplay in the constructions of risks and structural inequalities.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44176697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-11DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208149
B. Johnson, Marcus Mayorga, Byungdoo Kim
Abstract Identifying and understanding risk perceptions—“how bad are the harms” to humans or to what they value that people see as potentially or actually arising from entities or events—has been critical for risk analysis, both for its own sake, and for expected associations between risk perceptions and subsequent outcomes, such as risky or protective behavior, or support for hazard management policies. Cross-sectional surveys have been the dominant method for identifying and understanding risk perceptions, yielding valuable data. However, cross-sectional surveys are unable to probe the dynamics of risk perceptions over time, which is critical to do while living in a dynamically hazardous world and to build causal understandings. Building upon earlier longitudinal panel studies of Americans’ Ebola and Zika risk perceptions using multi-level modeling to assess temporal changes in these views and inter-individual factors affecting them, we examined patterns in Americans’ COVID-19 risk perceptions in six waves across 14 months. The findings suggest that, in general, risk perceptions increased from February 2020 to April 2021, but with varying trends across different risk perception measures (personal, collective, affective, affect, severity, and duration). Factors in baseline risk perceptions (Wave 1) and inter-individual differences across waves differed even more: baseline ratings were associated with how immediate the threat is (temporal distance) and how likely the threat would affect people like oneself (social distance), and following the United States news about the pandemic. Inter-individual trend differences were shaped most by temporal distance, whether local coronavirus infections were accelerating their upward trend, and subjective knowledge about viral transmission. Associations of subjective knowledge and risk trend with risk perceptions could change signs (e.g. from positive to negative) over time. These findings hold theoretical implications for risk perception dynamics and taxonomies, and research design implications for studying risk perception dynamics and their comparison across hazards.
{"title":"Americans’ COVID-19 risk perceptions and risk perception predictors changed over time","authors":"B. Johnson, Marcus Mayorga, Byungdoo Kim","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208149","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Identifying and understanding risk perceptions—“how bad are the harms” to humans or to what they value that people see as potentially or actually arising from entities or events—has been critical for risk analysis, both for its own sake, and for expected associations between risk perceptions and subsequent outcomes, such as risky or protective behavior, or support for hazard management policies. Cross-sectional surveys have been the dominant method for identifying and understanding risk perceptions, yielding valuable data. However, cross-sectional surveys are unable to probe the dynamics of risk perceptions over time, which is critical to do while living in a dynamically hazardous world and to build causal understandings. Building upon earlier longitudinal panel studies of Americans’ Ebola and Zika risk perceptions using multi-level modeling to assess temporal changes in these views and inter-individual factors affecting them, we examined patterns in Americans’ COVID-19 risk perceptions in six waves across 14 months. The findings suggest that, in general, risk perceptions increased from February 2020 to April 2021, but with varying trends across different risk perception measures (personal, collective, affective, affect, severity, and duration). Factors in baseline risk perceptions (Wave 1) and inter-individual differences across waves differed even more: baseline ratings were associated with how immediate the threat is (temporal distance) and how likely the threat would affect people like oneself (social distance), and following the United States news about the pandemic. Inter-individual trend differences were shaped most by temporal distance, whether local coronavirus infections were accelerating their upward trend, and subjective knowledge about viral transmission. Associations of subjective knowledge and risk trend with risk perceptions could change signs (e.g. from positive to negative) over time. These findings hold theoretical implications for risk perception dynamics and taxonomies, and research design implications for studying risk perception dynamics and their comparison across hazards.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42259824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-11DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208138
Sylvester Senyo Horvey, Jones Odei-Mensah
Abstract Global economic crises and complexities in the business environment have flawed the traditional risk management system. These have provided lessons to business leaders and enhanced the popularity of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM). ERM is the holistic approach to managing the overall risks of an organisation to achieve its strategic goals. Despite its relevance, the question about the appropriate measurement for ERM and the performance of ERM remains. This study provides a comprehensive and systematic literature review on the measurement and performance of ERM. Google Scholar was the primary search tool for ERM literature from 2001 to 2020, and papers listed in SCImago journal ranking were discussed. According to the review, there is no specific approach to measuring ERM; hence, scholars rely on different proxies. Most studies rely on secondary sources, particularly the Chief Risk Officer’s appointment as a simple ERM proxy. This approach is widely adopted in the literature due to the difficulty in assessing ERM information. This paper recommends that further studies on the empirical measurement of ERM should rely on both primary and secondary data as they complement each other. This will provide more insight and allow more factors to be considered for a robust ERM measurement. In terms of performance, the ERM literature reveals mixed findings; however, there is enough evidence to support the assertion that ERM enhances firm profitability and value. Also, an advanced level of ERM implementation significantly improves firm performance. We suggest that scholars consider examining the ERM-performance relationship in emerging economies, as most of these studies centred on the US and European economies. In addition, future studies should consider investigating the non-linear relationship and how moderating factors affect the ERM-performance relationship. Firms must also strengthen their ERM system, as a higher level of ERM implementation improves performance.
{"title":"The measurements and performance of enterprise risk management: a comprehensive literature review","authors":"Sylvester Senyo Horvey, Jones Odei-Mensah","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208138","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Global economic crises and complexities in the business environment have flawed the traditional risk management system. These have provided lessons to business leaders and enhanced the popularity of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM). ERM is the holistic approach to managing the overall risks of an organisation to achieve its strategic goals. Despite its relevance, the question about the appropriate measurement for ERM and the performance of ERM remains. This study provides a comprehensive and systematic literature review on the measurement and performance of ERM. Google Scholar was the primary search tool for ERM literature from 2001 to 2020, and papers listed in SCImago journal ranking were discussed. According to the review, there is no specific approach to measuring ERM; hence, scholars rely on different proxies. Most studies rely on secondary sources, particularly the Chief Risk Officer’s appointment as a simple ERM proxy. This approach is widely adopted in the literature due to the difficulty in assessing ERM information. This paper recommends that further studies on the empirical measurement of ERM should rely on both primary and secondary data as they complement each other. This will provide more insight and allow more factors to be considered for a robust ERM measurement. In terms of performance, the ERM literature reveals mixed findings; however, there is enough evidence to support the assertion that ERM enhances firm profitability and value. Also, an advanced level of ERM implementation significantly improves firm performance. We suggest that scholars consider examining the ERM-performance relationship in emerging economies, as most of these studies centred on the US and European economies. In addition, future studies should consider investigating the non-linear relationship and how moderating factors affect the ERM-performance relationship. Firms must also strengthen their ERM system, as a higher level of ERM implementation improves performance.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46560452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-09DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875
Zoe Adams, Magda Osman
Abstract This study aims to expand our understanding of institutional trust by examining how consumers express their trust in a UK product safety regulator, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS). It uses publicly available data from two waves of nationally representative surveys (N = 20,526) conducted by OPSS between November 2020 and August 2021. Questions were selected for analysis if they aligned with the organisation’s definition of a trusted regulator: protecting people and places, and empowering people to make good choices. Of the 211 survey items in Wave 1 and 150 in Wave 2, 42 pairs of questions were selected. Only nine of the 42 analyses were statistically significant, and of those only two were interpretable at a reliable statistical threshold (i.e. medium effect size threshold). The results are valuable in demonstrating how institutional trust may be affected by product safety-related behaviours, experiences, beliefs and attitudes concerning the risks to which consumers are potentially exposed. However, the general lack of reliable findings also highlights methodological challenges in the way official government surveys investigate institutional trust, risk, and general product safety issues on both a linguistic and conceptual level. By examining the survey results and the survey itself, we show how empirical and theoretical insights can inform government efforts to capture important phenomena.
{"title":"Institutional trust, risk and product safety: a consumer survey","authors":"Zoe Adams, Magda Osman","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study aims to expand our understanding of institutional trust by examining how consumers express their trust in a UK product safety regulator, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS). It uses publicly available data from two waves of nationally representative surveys (N = 20,526) conducted by OPSS between November 2020 and August 2021. Questions were selected for analysis if they aligned with the organisation’s definition of a trusted regulator: protecting people and places, and empowering people to make good choices. Of the 211 survey items in Wave 1 and 150 in Wave 2, 42 pairs of questions were selected. Only nine of the 42 analyses were statistically significant, and of those only two were interpretable at a reliable statistical threshold (i.e. medium effect size threshold). The results are valuable in demonstrating how institutional trust may be affected by product safety-related behaviours, experiences, beliefs and attitudes concerning the risks to which consumers are potentially exposed. However, the general lack of reliable findings also highlights methodological challenges in the way official government surveys investigate institutional trust, risk, and general product safety issues on both a linguistic and conceptual level. By examining the survey results and the survey itself, we show how empirical and theoretical insights can inform government efforts to capture important phenomena.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45493650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208146
Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Christine Eriksen, Benjamin Scharte
Abstract How can a focus on socio-technical vulnerability and uncertainty make cyber security more resilient? In this article, we provide a conceptual discussion of how to increase cyber resilience. First, we show how cyber security and resilience thinking co-evolved through their connection to critical infrastructures, and how the ensuing dominant technical focus inevitably always falls short due to the diverse societal values that underpin their critical social functions. We argue that a sole focus on aggregate systems neglects the important differences in how cyber threats are experienced and dealt with by individuals. Second, we draw on insights from social resilience and disaster management literature to establish a better link between individuals and cyber systems. We focus on two key aspects of cyber security that highlight its social nature: vulnerability and uncertainty. Instead of thinking of cyber security as a “technical problem + humans,” we suggest cyber security should be conceptualized as a “social problem + technology.” We conclude by highlighting three ways forward for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners: interdisciplinary research, public debate about a set of normative questions, and the need for an uncertainty discourse in politics and policymaking.
{"title":"Making cyber security more resilient: adding social considerations to technological fixes","authors":"Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Christine Eriksen, Benjamin Scharte","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208146","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How can a focus on socio-technical vulnerability and uncertainty make cyber security more resilient? In this article, we provide a conceptual discussion of how to increase cyber resilience. First, we show how cyber security and resilience thinking co-evolved through their connection to critical infrastructures, and how the ensuing dominant technical focus inevitably always falls short due to the diverse societal values that underpin their critical social functions. We argue that a sole focus on aggregate systems neglects the important differences in how cyber threats are experienced and dealt with by individuals. Second, we draw on insights from social resilience and disaster management literature to establish a better link between individuals and cyber systems. We focus on two key aspects of cyber security that highlight its social nature: vulnerability and uncertainty. Instead of thinking of cyber security as a “technical problem + humans,” we suggest cyber security should be conceptualized as a “social problem + technology.” We conclude by highlighting three ways forward for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners: interdisciplinary research, public debate about a set of normative questions, and the need for an uncertainty discourse in politics and policymaking.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47979450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208119
Kristi Nero, Kati Orru, Tor-Olav Nævestad, Alexandra Olson, Merja Airola, L. Savadori, Austeja Kazemekaityte, Gabriella Lovász, Jelena Kajganović
Abstract Homeless and materially disadvantaged people are considered particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. So far, there is no systematic knowledge about how the homeless and materially disadvantaged people perceive the risks of COVID-19 and what factors influence the development of sceptical views and underestimation of dangers posed by the virus. The aim of our study is therefore to: (1) Explore COVID-19 risk perception of socially marginalised individuals, focusing on their assessment of the probability of getting infected by the virus and the perceived harmful consequences of the disease; and (2) examine the factors influencing COVID-19 risk beliefs of these individuals. We use cross-sectional survey data with 273 participants from eight countries and data from 32 interviews and five workshops with managers and staff of social care organisations in ten European countries. Our results indicate that among survey participants, 49% can be labelled COVID-19 sceptics with regard to probability of getting infected, and 38% with regard to harmful consequences of the disease. We find that COVID-19 scepticism is related to low levels of all types of social capital, low trust in information from authorities and being a minority. However, the most important predictor is the respondents’ general lack of concern about health risks. Additionally, the qualitative data indicates the multifaceted nature of COVID-19 scepticism, as it may relate to the origins of COVID-19, the probability of infection, its consequences and protective measures, among others. Improved understanding about factors influencing COVID-19 scepticism in these groups contributes to a better understanding of the information disorder during crises, and the ways in which this could be managed through policies against marginalisation, including in disaster risk reduction.
{"title":"Mechanisms behind COVID-19 scepticism among socially marginalised individuals in Europe","authors":"Kristi Nero, Kati Orru, Tor-Olav Nævestad, Alexandra Olson, Merja Airola, L. Savadori, Austeja Kazemekaityte, Gabriella Lovász, Jelena Kajganović","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208119","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Homeless and materially disadvantaged people are considered particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. So far, there is no systematic knowledge about how the homeless and materially disadvantaged people perceive the risks of COVID-19 and what factors influence the development of sceptical views and underestimation of dangers posed by the virus. The aim of our study is therefore to: (1) Explore COVID-19 risk perception of socially marginalised individuals, focusing on their assessment of the probability of getting infected by the virus and the perceived harmful consequences of the disease; and (2) examine the factors influencing COVID-19 risk beliefs of these individuals. We use cross-sectional survey data with 273 participants from eight countries and data from 32 interviews and five workshops with managers and staff of social care organisations in ten European countries. Our results indicate that among survey participants, 49% can be labelled COVID-19 sceptics with regard to probability of getting infected, and 38% with regard to harmful consequences of the disease. We find that COVID-19 scepticism is related to low levels of all types of social capital, low trust in information from authorities and being a minority. However, the most important predictor is the respondents’ general lack of concern about health risks. Additionally, the qualitative data indicates the multifaceted nature of COVID-19 scepticism, as it may relate to the origins of COVID-19, the probability of infection, its consequences and protective measures, among others. Improved understanding about factors influencing COVID-19 scepticism in these groups contributes to a better understanding of the information disorder during crises, and the ways in which this could be managed through policies against marginalisation, including in disaster risk reduction.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47423975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208144
Liwen Zhang, Qing’an Zhou
Abstract The process through which people and society begin to see and frame something as risky is complex. As risk communication practitioners play a critical role in fostering real-world risk governance, this study emphasizes the performative role of language in mobilizing symbolic resources to build and control risks from a communication standpoint. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was used to reveal patterns of how two events – the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine dispute – were covered by the Chinese media, and speculate about the relationship between risk communication practice and its wider geopolitical context. Results revealed different frames were used for the two events, and that ‘threat’ was most frequently used when addressing the Russia-Ukraine dispute, whereas ‘risk’ was adopted for most COVID-19-related articles. Two themes were generated when interpreting the discourse through a critical geopolitical approach: ‘From the COVID-19 Approach to the Political Systems’ and ‘China as a global Player through its peaceful Rise’. While China prefers to maintain peace in its interaction with other global actors, the Chinese government does not simply accept adversity, particularly when it comes to geopolitical conflicts derived from arbitrary ideological disagreements. The study adds to the current literature on the relationship between the practice and context of risk communication, as well as to the underrepresented regional online news coverage of risks and conflicts that focus on China.
{"title":"Covering conflicts and risks: Chinese newspapers’ peace-loving discourse and their use of risk language","authors":"Liwen Zhang, Qing’an Zhou","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208144","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The process through which people and society begin to see and frame something as risky is complex. As risk communication practitioners play a critical role in fostering real-world risk governance, this study emphasizes the performative role of language in mobilizing symbolic resources to build and control risks from a communication standpoint. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was used to reveal patterns of how two events – the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine dispute – were covered by the Chinese media, and speculate about the relationship between risk communication practice and its wider geopolitical context. Results revealed different frames were used for the two events, and that ‘threat’ was most frequently used when addressing the Russia-Ukraine dispute, whereas ‘risk’ was adopted for most COVID-19-related articles. Two themes were generated when interpreting the discourse through a critical geopolitical approach: ‘From the COVID-19 Approach to the Political Systems’ and ‘China as a global Player through its peaceful Rise’. While China prefers to maintain peace in its interaction with other global actors, the Chinese government does not simply accept adversity, particularly when it comes to geopolitical conflicts derived from arbitrary ideological disagreements. The study adds to the current literature on the relationship between the practice and context of risk communication, as well as to the underrepresented regional online news coverage of risks and conflicts that focus on China.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45161732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208121
J. Fraser, Livia Mello, N. Kunz
Abstract Infrastructure projects increasingly encounter delays due to non-technical risks (NTR), those risks arising from interactions between business and external stakeholders with the potential to create future negative impacts on society and the environment. One sector where NTR is having a significant adverse impact is the global mining sector, where industry leaders rank NTRs as the leading cause of business risk. We investigate how NTRs are assessed during project pre-feasibility using semi-structured interviews with 20 respondents from major mining companies. We find four main factors contribute to the problem of NTR assessment: there is lack of clarity about what constitutes a NTR; there are different interpretations of how NTR is defined and evaluated; there are disciplinary silos within project teams that impede a holistic assessment of risk; and there is conflation between risk and root cause. These factors contribute to striking differences in perceptions of non-technical risks between professionals in project management versus their sustainability colleagues. A four step process is proposed to improve non-technical risk assessment, align project and sustainability professionals, and identify opportunities for mitigation measures. This work seeks to improve NTR management within mining, a sector that is under-represented in existing literature, by adding empirical research examining how project teams identify and assess non-technical risk and contributes to theory at the nexus of project management and sustainability.
{"title":"Lost in translation: inadequate non-technical risk assessment within major project teams in mining","authors":"J. Fraser, Livia Mello, N. Kunz","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208121","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208121","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Infrastructure projects increasingly encounter delays due to non-technical risks (NTR), those risks arising from interactions between business and external stakeholders with the potential to create future negative impacts on society and the environment. One sector where NTR is having a significant adverse impact is the global mining sector, where industry leaders rank NTRs as the leading cause of business risk. We investigate how NTRs are assessed during project pre-feasibility using semi-structured interviews with 20 respondents from major mining companies. We find four main factors contribute to the problem of NTR assessment: there is lack of clarity about what constitutes a NTR; there are different interpretations of how NTR is defined and evaluated; there are disciplinary silos within project teams that impede a holistic assessment of risk; and there is conflation between risk and root cause. These factors contribute to striking differences in perceptions of non-technical risks between professionals in project management versus their sustainability colleagues. A four step process is proposed to improve non-technical risk assessment, align project and sustainability professionals, and identify opportunities for mitigation measures. This work seeks to improve NTR management within mining, a sector that is under-represented in existing literature, by adding empirical research examining how project teams identify and assess non-technical risk and contributes to theory at the nexus of project management and sustainability.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42537992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-05DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2208142
J. C. S. Wong, J. Yang
Abstract Americans’ concerns about the risks of vaccination are rising in recent years. In the original piece that explicated the psychometric paradigm, vaccinations were rated as less dreaded and less unknown. However, in 2016, vaccinations were more dreaded and more unknown in the public eye. A national survey (N = 1025) conducted in August 2021 reflects this trend in risk perception of the COVID-19 vaccines. Individuals who report different risk perceptions based on the unknown and dread characteristics associated with the COVID-19 vaccines also report different behavioral intent toward the vaccines. Overall, these findings show unknown risk to have a more salient impact on participants’ risk perception that influence their vaccine-related decisions.
{"title":"Risk perception of the COVID-19 vaccines: revisiting the psychometric paradigm","authors":"J. C. S. Wong, J. Yang","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2208142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208142","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Americans’ concerns about the risks of vaccination are rising in recent years. In the original piece that explicated the psychometric paradigm, vaccinations were rated as less dreaded and less unknown. However, in 2016, vaccinations were more dreaded and more unknown in the public eye. A national survey (N = 1025) conducted in August 2021 reflects this trend in risk perception of the COVID-19 vaccines. Individuals who report different risk perceptions based on the unknown and dread characteristics associated with the COVID-19 vaccines also report different behavioral intent toward the vaccines. Overall, these findings show unknown risk to have a more salient impact on participants’ risk perception that influence their vaccine-related decisions.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45864934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：