Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk Assessment and the Nature of Expertise in Policy Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Power and Risk in Policymaking

  • 588 Accesses

Abstract

Chapter 1 has set out the problem space and the book’s aim, which ultimately is to examine how power and expertise in risk communication about public health and safety relate to policymaking. The book takes the view that risk communication is a field of ‘play and competition’ between the interests of competing stakeholders. Within this, the book recognises that the process of risk communication is about both winning an argument and competition for resources. This chapter begins by reviewing the literature on public health policymaking and unpicks the nature of problems faced in public health risk. It then considers the technique of risk assessment and examines the role of expertise in policy inquiry relating to risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adekola, J., Fischbacher-Smith, M., Fischbacher-Smith, D., & Adekola, O. (2017). Health risks from environmental degradation in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35, 334–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, P. (1984). From novice to expert. American Journal of Nursing, 82(3), 402–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownson, R. C., Chriqui, J. F., & Stamatakis, K. A. (2009). Understanding evidence-based public health policy. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1576–1583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castel, A. D., McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., & Heitman, J. L. (2007). The dark side of expertise domain-specific memory errors. Psychological Science, 18, 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D., & Reeve, C. (1986). Science speaks to power: The role of experts in policy making. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covello, V. T., & Merkhoher, M. W. (2013). Risk assessment methods: Approaches for assessing health and environmental risks. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25, 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1927). Search for the great community. In L. A. Hickman & T. M. Alexander (Eds.), The essential Dewey (p. 293). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dye, T. R. (1992). Understanding public policy. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelsky, C. (1990). Whose agenda is this anyway? A response to McKenna, Robinson, and Miller. Educational Researcher, 19, 7–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filar, J. A., & Haurie, A. (2010). Uncertainty and environmental decision making. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher-Smith, D. (2012). Getting pandas to breed: Paradigm blindness and the policy space for risk prevention, mitigation and management. Risk Management, 14(3), 177–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher-Smith, D., & Calman, K. (2010). A precautionary tale–the role of the precautionary principle in policy making for public health. In Risk communication and public health (p. 197). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher-Smith, D., Irwin, A., & Fischbacher-Smith, M. (2010). Bringing light to the shadows and shadows to the light: Risk, risk management, and risk communication. In P. Bennet, K. Calman, S. Curtis, & D. Fischbacher-Smith (Eds.), Risk Communication and Public Health (pp. 23–38). Oxford University Press: Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562848.003.02. ISBN 9780199562848.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (1995). Evaluating public policy. Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grint, K. (2010). Wicked problems and clumsy solutions: The role of leadership. In The new public leadership challenge (pp. 169–186). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, W. W., Mossialos, E., Allin, S., McKee, M., & World Health, O. (2004). Making decisions on public health: A review of eight countries. Copenhagen: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R. (2010). From “knowledge use” towards “boundary work”: Sketch of an emerging new agenda for inquiry into science-policy interaction. In Knowledge Democracy (pp. 169–186). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. (2002). Citizen science: A study of people expertise and sustainable development. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. (2015). Citizen science and scientific citizenship. In Science communication today. Nancy Université.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A., Smith, D., & Griffiths, R. (1982). Risk analysis and public policy for major hazards. Physics in Technology, 13, 258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2009). The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002). A new approach to risk evaluation and management: Risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis, 22, 1071–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, K. M., & Pinney, N. (1990). The effects of general and domain-specific expertise on political memory and judgment. Social Cognition, 8, 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. (1987). Experts, risk communication, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 7, 125–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (2011). Normal accidents: Living with high risk technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2015). American public policy: Promise and performance. Los Angeles: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J., Horlick-Jones, T., Murdock, G., Hargreaves, D., McLachlan, S., & Lofstedt, R. (2001). Social amplification of risk: The media and the public. Sudbury: HSE Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., & Barnett, J. (2013). Chalara and the social amplification of risk. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2008). Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. London: Earthscan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Renn O., & Klinke A. (2015). Risk governance and resilience: New approaches to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity. In U. Fra. Paleo. (Eds.), Risk governance (pp. 19–41). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9328-5_2

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., & Sellke, P. (2011). Risk, society and policy making: Risk governance in a complex world. International Journal of Performability Engineering, 7, 349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., Klinke, A., & Van Asselt, M. (2011). Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: A synthesis. Ambio, 40, 231–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). 2.3 planning problems are wicked. Polity, 4, 155–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, W. D. (1977). Anatomy of risk. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., Körkel, J., & Weinert, F. E. (1989). Domain-specific knowledge and memory performance: A comparison of high-and low-aptitude children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette, K. (1996). Methodological rules for four classes of scientific uncertainty. Scientific uncertainty and environmental problem solving (pp. 12–39). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1999). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis, 19, 689–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., & McCloskey, J. (2000). History repeating itself? Risk management and society. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spruijt, P., Knol, A. B., Vasileiadou, E., Devilee, J., Lebret, E., & Petersen, A. C. (2014). Roles of scientists as policy advisers on complex issues: A literature review. Environmental Science & Policy, 40, 16–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (2003). Risk, uncertainty and precaution: Some instrumental implications from the social sciences. Negotiating change. In F. Berkhout (Ed.), Negotiating Environmental Change: New Perspectives from Social Science (pp. 33–76). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suleiman, E. N. (1977). The myth of technical expertise: Selection, organization, and leadership. Comparative Politics, 10, 137–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. W., & Grindle, M. S. (1990). After the decision: Implementing policy reforms in developing countries. World Development, 18, 1163–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titterton, M. (2004). Risk and risk taking in health and social welfare. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underdal, A. (2010). Complexity and challenges of long-term environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 20, 386–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, E. P., & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (2002). Real science: What it is and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK

    Josephine Adekola

Authors
  1. Josephine Adekola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josephine Adekola .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Adekola, J. (2020). Risk Assessment and the Nature of Expertise in Policy Making. In: Power and Risk in Policymaking. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19314-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation