Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Analysing complicity in risk

Research

Associated organisational units

Electronic data

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Analysing complicity in risk

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Analysing complicity in risk. / Busby, J S.
In: Risk Analysis, Vol. 28, No. 6, 2008, p. 1571-1582.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Busby, JS 2008, 'Analysing complicity in risk', Risk Analysis, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 1571-1582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x

APA

Busby, J. S. (2008). Analysing complicity in risk. Risk Analysis, 28(6), 1571-1582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x

Vancouver

Busby JS. Analysing complicity in risk. Risk Analysis. 2008;28(6):1571-1582. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x

Author

Busby, J S. / Analysing complicity in risk. In: Risk Analysis. 2008 ; Vol. 28, No. 6. pp. 1571-1582.

Bibtex

@article{2005eb1afe794c7bbbbcfc65f8aeca28,
title = "Analysing complicity in risk",
abstract = "When risks generate anger rather than fear, there is at least someone who regards the imposition of those risks as wrongdoing; and it then makes sense to speak of the involvement in producing those risks as complicity. It is particularly relevant to examine the complicity of risk bearers, because this is likely to have a strong influence on how far other actors should go in providing them with protection. This article makes a case for analyzing complicity explicitly, in parallel with normal processes of risk assessment, and proposes a framework for this analysis. It shows how it can be applied in a case study of maritime transportation, and examines the practical and theoretical difficulties of this kind of analysis. The conclusion is that the analysis has to be formative rather than summative, but that it could provide a useful way of exposing differences in the assumptions of different actors about agency and responsibility.",
author = "Busby, {J S}",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "1571--1582",
journal = "Risk Analysis",
issn = "0272-4332",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysing complicity in risk

AU - Busby, J S

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - When risks generate anger rather than fear, there is at least someone who regards the imposition of those risks as wrongdoing; and it then makes sense to speak of the involvement in producing those risks as complicity. It is particularly relevant to examine the complicity of risk bearers, because this is likely to have a strong influence on how far other actors should go in providing them with protection. This article makes a case for analyzing complicity explicitly, in parallel with normal processes of risk assessment, and proposes a framework for this analysis. It shows how it can be applied in a case study of maritime transportation, and examines the practical and theoretical difficulties of this kind of analysis. The conclusion is that the analysis has to be formative rather than summative, but that it could provide a useful way of exposing differences in the assumptions of different actors about agency and responsibility.

AB - When risks generate anger rather than fear, there is at least someone who regards the imposition of those risks as wrongdoing; and it then makes sense to speak of the involvement in producing those risks as complicity. It is particularly relevant to examine the complicity of risk bearers, because this is likely to have a strong influence on how far other actors should go in providing them with protection. This article makes a case for analyzing complicity explicitly, in parallel with normal processes of risk assessment, and proposes a framework for this analysis. It shows how it can be applied in a case study of maritime transportation, and examines the practical and theoretical difficulties of this kind of analysis. The conclusion is that the analysis has to be formative rather than summative, but that it could provide a useful way of exposing differences in the assumptions of different actors about agency and responsibility.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01111.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

SP - 1571

EP - 1582

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

SN - 0272-4332

IS - 6

ER -