Risk reality vs risk perception

Micic, T. (2016). Risk reality vs risk perception. Journal of Risk Research, doi: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1121900

[img] Text - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 22 July 2018.

Download (474kB) | Request a copy


Here we explore new tools to improve risk communication within built infrastructure procurement by considering quantitative engineering risk and perceived risk associated with groups of stakeholders. In particular, the perceived risk is assumed to be dependent on motivational values that individuals identify with. The motivational values are evaluated using 40 questions Swartz Portrait Value Questionnaires. Ten hazards are considered in a survey to identify two dimensions, fear and unknown for a specific group of stakeholders. From the outcomes, it was identified that using a hybrid approach to establish the motivational values and risk perceptions for the stakeholder group risk communication could be improved. Furthermore, the outcomes could be used to target information to stakeholders or intervene to ensure that infrastructure performs according to expectation. As a result, it could become possible to revise what are currently inconsistent acceptable risk levels that have been embedded in regulatory documentation.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Risk Research and available online at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13669877.2015.1121900
Uncontrolled Keywords: built infrastructure, risk communication, risk perception, risk acceptability
Subjects: T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)
Divisions: School of Engineering & Mathematical Sciences > Engineering
URI: http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/13489

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item


Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics