Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Three-Party Model Tool for Ethical Risk Analysis
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0071-3919
2007 (English)In: Risk Management: An International Journal, ISSN 1460-3799, Vol. 9, no 3, 129-144 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Ethical aspects are crucial in the analysis of risk, but they have often been neglected. One of the reasons for this is the lack of operational tools for the ethical analysis of risks. A model for ethical risk analysis is proposed that focuses on the ethical relationships between three critical parties (or roles) that are present in almost all risk-related decisions: the risk-exposed, the beneficiary and the decision-maker. Seven crucial questions are proposed that can be used to characterize these relationships. It is shown with examples from the railway sector how they can be used to identify the salient ethical features of risk management problems.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 9, no 3, 129-144 p.
Keyword [en]
risk analysis, ethics, risk-exposed, beneficiary, decision-maker
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-7775DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.rm.8250028OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-7775DiVA: diva2:12901
Note
QC 20100714Available from: 2007-12-10 Created: 2007-12-10 Last updated: 2010-11-16Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Rights at Risk: Ethical Issues in Risk Management
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Rights at Risk: Ethical Issues in Risk Management
2007 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
Abstract [en]

he subject of this thesis is ethical aspects of decision-making concerning social risks. It is argued that a model for risk management must acknowledge several ethical aspects and, most crucial among these, the individual’s right not to be unfairly exposed to risks.

Article I takes as its starting point the demand frequently expressed in the risk literature for consistent risk management. It is maintained that a model focusing on cost-benefit analysis does not respect the rights of the individual. Two alternative models are outlined. They evolve around the separateness of individuals, rights, and fair risk taking. It is claimed that a model that focuses on a fair procedure for risk decisions seems most fruitful to develop.

Article II discusses the NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) conflict. The ethical premises behind the negative characterization of the NIMBY concept are investigated. It is argued that a collective weighing of risks and benefits ignores individuals’ rights not to be unfairly exposed to risks in siting scenarios.

Article III presents a three-party model tool for ethical risk analysis. The focus in such analysis is a discussion of three parties that are involved in risk decisions: the risk-exposed, the beneficiary, and the decision-maker. Seven crucial ethical questions are discerned by combining these parties pairwise.

Article IV discusses a model for procedural justice for risk decisions. Two theories of deliberative democracy are explored. The first focuses on a hypothetical contract, the second argues for the actual inclusion of affected parties. It is maintained that hypothetical reasoning should mainly serve as a guide concerning risk issues that affect people who cannot be included in the decision-making process. Otherwise an interactive dialogical reasoning is to be preferred.

Article V explores the claim that there are no real, objective risks – only subjective descriptions of them. It is argued that even though every risk can be described in different ways, involve value judgements and emotions, the ideal of objectivity should not be abandoned.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH, 2007. viii, 22 p.
Series
Theses in philosophy from the Royal Institute of Technology, ISSN 1650-8831 ; 25
Keyword
Risk, risk management, consistency, ethics, rights, cost-benefit, interpersonal weighing
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-4570 (URN)978-91-7178-810-8 (ISBN)
Public defence
2007-12-17, Sal D3, KTH, Lindstedtsvägen 5, Stockholm, 13:00
Opponent
Supervisors
Note
QC 20100714Available from: 2007-12-10 Created: 2007-12-10 Last updated: 2010-07-14Bibliographically approved
2. Ethical aspects of risk management
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ethical aspects of risk management
2006 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
Abstract [en]

The subject of this thesis is ethical aspects of risk management. It is argued that a model for risk management needs to be developed that acknowledges several ethical aspects and most crucial among these, the individual’s right not to be unfairly exposed to risks.

Article I takes as its starting point the demand frequently expressed in the risk literature for a consistent risk management. Such consistency is often assumed to be in accordance with some kind of cost-benefit analysis. It is maintained that such a model, here called the Standard Model, does not respect the rights of the individual. Two alternative models are outlined in order to better deal with this ethical weakness, the Model of Inviolable Rights and the Model of Procedural Justice. The arguments in the alternative models evolve around the separateness of individuals, rights and fair risk taking. It is claimed that the latter model, which focuses on a fair procedure, seems most fruitful to develop.

Article II is a discussion of the NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) conflict, which is well known from situations of siting potentially risky facilities. Of special concern is to investigate what the ethical premises are behind the negative characterization of the NIMBY concept. It is argued that, contrary to the assumption that the total benefit should outweigh the individual’s cost, individuals in siting scenarios have rights not to be unfairly exposed to risks.

Article III, which is co-authored with Professor Sven Ove Hansson, presents a three party model as a tool for ethical risk analysis. It is argued that ethical dimensions need to be acknowledged in the analysis of risks and that this is best done through a discussion of three parties that are involved in risk decisions – the risk-exposed, the beneficiary, and the decisionmaker. Seven crucial ethical questions are recognized and discussed regarding the relation between these parties. By using examples from the railway sector it is shown how the questions can be used to identify salient ethical features of risk management problems.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH, 2006. vii, 20 p.
Keyword
Risk, risk management, consistency, ethics, rights, cost-benefit, interpersonal weighing, decision-procedure, informed consent, NIMBY
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-3948 (URN)91-7178-346-6 (ISBN)
Presentation
2006-05-23, Seminarierummet, Avd. för filosofi, KTH, Teknikringen 78, Stockholm, 10:00
Opponent
Supervisors
Note
QC 20101116Available from: 2006-05-10 Created: 2006-05-10 Last updated: 2010-11-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPalgrave

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hermansson, HélèneHansson, Sven Ove
By organisation
Philosophy
In the same journal
Risk Management: An International Journal
Philosophy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 283 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf