Social Response to Risk

Taking
What we will look at
Perceived Vs Real risk
Responses to risky behaviour safety guidelines,
qualifications, instructor:participant ratios, legal
action, media coverage, documentation,
evaluation of activity
Long term social, environmental and
management effects of risk-taking behaviour
Risks Defined
Absolute risk: the uppermost limit of the risk
inherent in a situation (no safety controls
present).
Real risk: the amount of risk which actually

exists at a given moment in time (absolute

risk adjusted by safety controls).
Perceived risk: an individuals subjective

assessment of the real risk present at any

time (Haddock, 1993).
Perceptions are influenced by the society
in which we operate, including aspects
such as:
as wealth, demographics, technology and the media (Slovic, 1990).
Another aspect that impacts upon perceptions of risk is public
outrage, which may further be influenced by over twenty factors
such as:

1. the level of voluntary choice to accept or reject the risk

2. the level of control the individual has to prevent or mitigate the risk
3. how fair the level of risk is given the expected benefit
4. the publics perception of the organisation, such as the level of trust
or caring
5. the familiarity people have with the activity, such as football versus
BASE jumping (Sandman, 1990; Segal & Sandman, 1990).

Perceptions of risk are in the eye of the beholder, that is, they are
very individual. If perceptions of risk are individual, then can the
same be concluded about why people take risks and how much risk
they are willing to take?
Perceived Vs Real risk

Challenging Challenging and risky

But relatively safe
Perceived Risk

No real challenge DANGEROUS!!!

Generally safe

Real Risk
Typical Pattern- Emergency response
Outdoors Tragedy

Media Response Coronial Inquest

Public Pressure

Court Action Government Regulation

Typical pattern- Emergency response:
Explained
1. Incident occurs
2. - Media reports incident perhaps sensationalising,
over-emphasising or de-emphasising particular aspects
- Coroner inquest/investigation:
Incident is investigated. If a death is involved the
investigation will usually be by the Coroner. The coroner
interview people involved and experts, presents a report,
and makes some recommendations. Recommendations
may include technology and safety issues, rules and
regulations, certification and accreditation, infrastructure
issues.
3. Public responds through newspaper editorials, web
postings and radio talkback
4. Government/industry enacts new or modified
legislation to incorporate the coroners findings and
recommendations.
SUMMARY OF SOCIETYS RESPONSES TO
RISK TAKING

Media responses including outrage over

incidents
Legal responses including coroners
investigations, court action and legislation
Increase in insurance costs

Development of infrastructure fences, roads,

signs
Rules and regulations

Accreditation of instructors

New technologies including safety equipment

Idolisation of adventurers and other

participants
IMPACTS TO NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS
AS A RESULT OF THESE SOCIAL
RESPONSES
Discuss the sorts of impacts we might expect as a
result of these responses.

Increased safety might encourage more people to

participate and increase negative pressure on
environments, or increase positive appreciation of
environments.
Legal responses and restrictions may reduce the
number of participants and benefit environments
that are left alone
Idolisation of adventurers may encourage
unprepared people to enter environments and lead
to negative effects (like erosion, clearing, damage
to native vegetation, pollution, etc.)
Fear arising from negative portrayals of
environments may lead to negative views and a
reduction in care for such places
Examples of Social Response to
Risk Taking
Certification of Participants or
Leaders
E.g. Uni. Or Tafe Courses in Outdoor
Education/Recreation
Makes activity safer, but more expensive.

Groups led by certified leaders likely to be

more responsible in regard to the

environment.
Erection of Signs, Shelters and Snow
Poles, rails at Look-Outs
E.g. Huts at Mt. Stirling, handrails popular
coastal lookouts
Improves safety, gives false sense of
security, decreases sense of adventure and
responsibility for own actions.
Visual impact and encourages use.
Long term social, environmental and
management effects of risk-taking
behaviour
Social effects: Cost of activities increases, cost of
rescue, questioning the NEED to participate,
questioning of leader and participant qualifications,
review of industry standards. Reduction in the
opportunity to participate in these activities.
Environmental effects: Access restrictions or
closure of sites in fragile areas use of zoning to
decrease environmental impacts
Management effects: Regulations and permits
brought in for both area and participant in parks
owned and managed by the State and Federal
Governments.
Example Horse riding in the Alpine National Park
and surrounds.