Managing and Communicating Risk: Implications for eDemocracy

1
Managing and Communicating Risk Implications
for e-Democracy

• Simon French
• Manchester Business School
• simon.french_at_mbs.ac.uk

2
Bayesian analysis modelling, inference, and
decision
3
Bayesian analysis modelling, inference, and
decision
4
A personal journey

• Until 1990
• theoretical Bayesian statistical, risk and
  decision analyst
• some business experience (, market share)
• International Chernobyl Project
• Study of factors driving decision making
• not radiological
• but stress and public acceptability
• 1996 morbidity in excess of 70 found in some
  affected regions of Byelorus
• Poor information management and communication
  increased stress and stress related illness.

5
Ethos

• Pilot research project to help people in
  Byelorus live with the contamination
• Set in Olmany (1265 people)
• The villagers themselves develop strategies by
  calling on expert knowledge
• Methodology has proven effective and Olmany
  villagers are transferring it more widely.
• The key was building trust

6
Trust is important

• In several ways
• In the communications and advice on handling a
  risk
• For informed decision making
• For e-Democracy

7
Trust in communications and advice seems to
depend on

• competence - appropriate technical expertise?
• objectivity - message free from bias?
• fairness - all points of view acknowledged
• consistency - of statements and behaviour over
  time reversal likely to be critical
• consistency over several issues/events
• Trust underlies confidence leading to credibility

8
Informed decision making

• There are two aspects to informed decision making
• Communication effectivenessDoes the information
  provided actually inform the public?
• True devolution of responsibilityAre the public
  trusted and truly given the freedom to make their
  individual decisions?

9
E-Democracy requires Trust

• At various levels
• In system generally
• In system for given context
• In contributions (votes, discussion, revelations
  of belief and preference, )

10
Past to manage a societal risk

• we need to draw together
• scientific assessments of the specific risks
• assessments of the broader risks
• evaluations of the potential impacts
• actions to mitigate the risks
• Oh, yes and
• tell the public what we are doing and what they
  should do.

11
Present to manage a societal risk

• we need to draw together
• scientific assessments of the specific risks
• assessments of the broader risks
• evaluations of the potential impacts
• actions to mitigate the risks
• communication of the issues and measures taken to
  enable stakeholders to take informed decisions

12
Future to manage a societal risk

• we need to draw together
• scientific assessments of the specific risks
• assessments of the broader risks
• evaluations of the potential impacts
• actions to mitigate the risks

13
Future to manage a societal risk

• we need to draw together
• scientific assessments of the specific risks
• assessments of the broader risks
• evaluations of the potential impacts
• actions to mitigate the risks

Involvement of all stakeholders in the decision
for themselves and for society.
14
Societal Risk Management

• should be more than identifying and dealing
  with the physical, technological, biological
  risks viz
• the SCIENCE

• It requires
• communication with all stakeholders
• a recognition of their
• perceptions (their science)
• values (social and political intangibles)
• their involvement

15
Fischhoffs stages

• 1. All we have to do is get the numbers right
• 2. All we have to do is tell them the numbers
• 3. All we have to do is explain what we mean by
  the numbers
• 4. All we have to do is show them that theyve
  accepted similar risks in the past

• 5. All we have to do is show them its a good
  deal for them
• 6. All we have to do is treat them nice
• 7. All we have to do is make them partners
• 8. All of these

16
Fischhoffs stages

• 1. All we have to do is get the numbers right
• 2. All we have to do is tell them the numbers
• 3. All we have to do is explain what we mean by
  the numbers
• 4. All we have to do is show them that theyve
  accepted similar risks in the past

• 5. All we have to do is show them its a good
  deal for them
• 6. All we have to do is treat them nice
• 7. All we have to do is make them partners
• 8. All of these

Valueshow much it matters if it does
Sciencewhat might happen
17
Bayesian analysis Science and Values
18
Science

• Public understanding of Science
• Science doesnt have all the answers
• Confused by Sciences
• objectivity and its
• lack of objectivity

19
Culture of the Scientific Method

• Science is about not committing to a hypothesis
  before there is sufficient evidence.
• So hypothesis testing is key to Science

H0 - Null hypothesis H1 - Alternative hypothesis
Even Bayesian statistical approaches encode the
same Scientific Method, albeit through the spread
of different distributions.
20
Risk management

• requires that the decision makers (society)
  commit to a course of action before there is
  sufficient evidence...
• often hardly any evidence.
• The Bayesian paradigm works whether there is
  hard data or just expert views.
• It allows the exploration of issues before
  evidence accumulates.

21
Values

• Risks are generally more worrying (and hence less
  acceptable) if they are

• involuntary
• inequitable
• unavoidable
• unfamiliar
• unnatural
• ill-understood

• long delayed
• inter-generational
• dreaded
• focused on identified individuals
• compromised by contradictory science

22
Cultural Theory

• Individualist/Entrepreneurs risks present
  opportunity, save those that threaten freedom of
  choice and action within free markets
• Hierarchists fear threats to social order and
  believe technological and environmental risks can
  be managed within set limits.
• Fatalists do not knowingly accept risks but
  accept what is in store for them.
• Egalitarians fear risks to the environment, the
  collective good and future generations.

23
Players
Decision Makers
24
Interactions with stakeholders
Decision Makers(Government, Agencies)
Processexpertise
Analysts
25
Interactions with stakeholders
Decision Makers(Government Agencies)
Processexpertise
Analysts
26
Interactions with stakeholders
Many interacting micro systems of decision
making guided by experts and impacting on many
stakeholders
27
Interactions with stakeholders
Alternative views of Science
Experts
Science
Experts
Government and establishment to public often
(too) one way
Decision Makers(Government, Agencies)
Analysts
28
Project for FSA
29
(No Transcript)
30
Messages for TED

• The players have different perspectives
• perspectives and roles change over time
• Communication is not easy!
• Trust may be key for effective e-Democracy
• and trust has many dimensions