Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk and Information: For a New Conceptual Framework

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Risk, Disaster and Crisis Reduction

  • 849 Accesses

Abstract

Dissemination of information is more complex, less linear and more heterogeneous than dominant scientific models propose. These models suggest that information is conveyed from a transmitter to a precise receiver by means of known socio-technical intermediaries. By closely observing how, in three distinct situations (Chaps. 2, 3 and 4), risk and crisis information is collected, processed, disseminated and used, this book will delve into the numerous processes by which information travels. The underlying hypothesis of this book is that these processes represent an important condition for the information to reach the receiver. This chapter describes the theoretical framework which is composed of four theoretical statements. The first statement relates to crises and risk situations and the need to integrate temporality and spatiality into the understanding of risks. The second concerns the importance of taking account of the contextualised facts and varied levels of knowledge inherent in all risk and crisis situations. The third shows how information should be seen as a process and a succession of interpretations. Finally, the fourth stage sets out the milestones for a new conceptual framework for the circulation of information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It should be noted that this book is the second edition by Blaikie et al. (1994), which has been considerably reworked and expanded, in particular with regard to the subject of vulnerability.

  2. 2.

    Nevertheless, the old categories do still reappear, particularly during conferences, which offer separate sessions dealing with natural risks, major technological risks or social risks; in addition, some books deal with these risks in separate chapters.

  3. 3.

    The UNISDR was previously called ISDR (International Strategy of Disaster Reduction).

  4. 4.

    According to Pelling, “Vulnerability denotes exposure to risk and an inability to avoid or absorb potential harm” (2003: 5).

  5. 5.

    See for instance the Journal of Alpine Research/Revue de géographie alpine on this topic: “Natural risks and urban growth” (no. 4, 1994).

References

  • Adger, N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16, 268–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerman, M., & Peltola, T. (2006). Constituting the space for decision making – Conflicting calculations in a dispute over fuel choice at a local heating plant. Geoforum, 37(5), 779–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali, H. S., & Keil, R. (2006). Global cities and the spread of infectious disease: the case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in Toronto, Canada. Urban Studies, 43(3), 491–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakis, H. (1995). Communication et changement global: un defi politique et culturel. International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique, 16(3), 225–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bankoff, G., Frerks, G., & Hilhorst, D. (Eds.). (2004). Mapping vulnerability: Disasters, development and people. London: Earthscan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (2000 [1972]). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berque, A. (2000). L’écoumène: introduction à l’étude des milieux humains. Paris: Belin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessy, C., & Chateauraynaud, F. (1995). Experts et faussaires: pour une sociologie de la perception. Paris: Métailié.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickerstaff, K., & Simmons, P. (2004). The right tool for the job? Modeling, spatial relationships, and styles of scientific practice in the UK foot and mouth crisis. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22, 393–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, N., Enticott, G., & Hinchliffe, S. (2008). Biosecurity: Spaces, practices, and boundaries. Environment and Planning A, 40(7), 1528–1533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, J., & Lubkowski, Z. (2005). Managing tsunami risk. The Lancet, 365 (January 22), 271–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkmann, J. (Ed.). (2006). Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards presents a broad range of current approaches to measuring vulnerability. New Delhi: TERI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. et al. (1994). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, and disasters. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodhag, C. (2000). Information, gouvernance et developpement durable. International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique, 21(3), 311–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, I., Kates, R. W., & White, G. F. (1978). The environment as hazard. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? (pp. 196–223). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1996). Le travail de la conception en architecture. In D. Valabrègue (Ed.), Situations (Vol. 37, pp. 25–35). Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architecturale. Marseille: Editions Parenthèses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., & Law, J. (1997). L’irruption des non-humains dans les sciences humaines. In B. Raynaud (Ed.), Les limites de la rationalité, Les figures du collectif, Colloque de Cerisy (Vol. 2, pp. 99–118). Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., & Rip, A. (1992). Humains, non-humains: morale d’une coexistence. In J. Theys & B. Kalaora (Eds.), La Terre Outragée, les experts sont formels (Vol. 1, pp. 140–156). Paris: Ed. Autrement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2009). Acting in an uncertain world an essay on technical democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardona, O.-D. (2004). The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a holistic perspective: A necessary review and criticism for effective risk management. In G. Bankoff, G. Frerks, & D. Hilhorst (Eds.), Mapping vulnerability: Disasters, development and people (pp. 37–51). London: Earthscan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castenfors, K., & Svedin, L. (2001). Crisis communication: Learning from the 1998 LPG near miss in Stockholm. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 88, 235–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, A., Campbell, S., Rogers, A., & Roland, M. (2002). Users’ understanding of medical knowledge in general practice. Social Science & Medicine, 54(8), 1215–1224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, J. (2008). Environmental risk, uncertainty, and participation: Mapping an emergent epistemic community. Environment and Planning A, 40(12), 2990–3008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covello, V., & Johnson, B. (1987). The social and cultural construction of risk: Issues, methods and case studies. In B. Johnson & V. Covello (Eds.), The social and cultural construction of risk: Essays on risk selection and perception (pp. vii–xiii). Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covello, V. T., von Winterfeldt, D., & Slovic, P. (1986). Risk communication: A review of literature. Risk Abstracts, 3(4), 171–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covello, V. T., McCallum, D. B., & Pavlova, M. T. (Eds.). (1989). Effective risk communication. The role and responsibility of government and nongovernment organizations. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S. L. (2003). The vulnerability of science and the science of vulnerability. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S. L. (2005). The geography of social vulnerability: Race, class, and catastrophe. Understanding Katrina: Perspectives from the Social Sciences. Available via Social Science Research Council. http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/Cutter/. Accessed 5 Dec 2013.

  • Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., et al. (2008). A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18, 598–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, C. H., Johnson, C., Lizarralde, G., Dikmen, N., & Sliwinski, A. (2007). Truths and myths about community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat International, 31(1), 100–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, A. (2008). Biosecurity after the event: Risk politics and animal disease. Environment and planning A, 40(7), 1552–1567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois-Maury, J., & Chaline, C. (2002). Les risques urbains. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Inspector General. (2003, August 31). Evaluation report: Epa’s response to the world trade center collapse: Challenges, successes, and areas for improvement (Report No. 2003-P-00012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewald, F. (1996). Histoire de l’Etat-Providence: les origines de la solidarité. Paris: Grasset.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fessenden-Raden, J., Fitchen, J., & Heath, J. (1987). Providing risk information in communities: Factors influencing what is heard and accepted. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 12(3/4), 94–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galland, J.-P. (1998). Les risques du Ministère de l’Équipement, des Transports et du Logement. Notes du Centre de Prospective et de Veille Scientifique. Paris: Ministère de l’Équipement, des Transports et du Logement, Direction de la Recherche et des Affaires Scientifiques et Techniques.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galland, J.-P. (2003). Calculer, gérer, réduire les risques: des actions disjointes? Annales des Ponts et Chaussées, 106, 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glatron, S. (1996). Evaluer les risques liés au stockage et au transport des hydrocarbures en milieu urbain: l’exemple du dépôt d’Ivry-sur-Seine. Revue de Géographie de Lyon, 71(1), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, B. (1998). Comment faire de l’anthropologie médicale? Médecine, rationalité et vécu (S. Gleize, Trans., Les empêcheurs de penser en rond). Le Plessis-Robinson: Synthélabo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutteling, J. M., & Wiegman, O. (1996). Exploring risk communication (Advances in natural and technological hazards research, Vol. 8). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, S. (2004). A ‘post-foundational’ interpretation of risk: Risk as ‘performance’. Journal of Risk Research, 7(3), 277–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, R. L., & O’Hair, D. H. (2008). Handbook of risk and crisis and crisis communication. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helman, C. (1994). Culture, health and illness. Londres: Butterworth & Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt, K. (1997). Regions of risk: A geographical introduction to disasters. Singapore: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinchliffe, S. (2001). Indeterminacy in-decisions – Science, policy and politics in the BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) crisis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(2), 182–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, B. J. (2008). Communicating about emerging infectious disease: The importance of research. Health, Risk & Society, 10(4), 349–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (1994). Learning from disaster. Risk management after Bhopal. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, J. X., & Kasperson, R. E. (2001). Global environmental risk. London: Earthscan/The United Nations University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, J. X., & Kasperson, R. E. (2005). The social contours of risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., & Stallen, P. J. M. (Eds.). (1991). Communicating risks to the public: International perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirmayer, L. J. (1992). The body’s insistence on meaning: Metaphor as presentation and representation in illness experience. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 6(4), 323–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2006). Systemic risks as challenge for policy making in risk governance. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research [on-line Journal], 7(1), 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory. A fey clarifications. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999a). Pandora’s hope. Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999b). On recalling ANT. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network and after (pp. 15–25). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2004). Politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Guildford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavigne, J.-C., et al. (1988). Dynamique urbaine et gestion des risques: les processus en jeu dans la COURLY. Paris: Plan Urbain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. (2004). Disaster in agriculture: Or foot and mouth mobilities. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 227–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leanza, Y. (2011). Exercer la pédiatrie en contexte multiculturel. Une approche complémentariste du rapport institutionnalisé à l’Autre (Collection Médecine Société). Genève: Georg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, M., & Perry, R. (2004). Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, R., & McMain, A. (2009). Risk communication: A handbook for communicating environmental, safety, and health risks (4th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupton, D. (1994). Medicine as culture. Illness, disease and the body in Western societies. Londres: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupton, D. (Ed.). (1999). Risk and sociocultural theory: New directions and perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maisonneuve, D. (Ed.). (2005). La communication des risques: un nouveau défi. Montréal: Presses de l’Université du Québec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maisonneuve, D., Saouter, C., & Char, A. (Eds.). (1999). Communications en temps de crise. Québec: Presses de l’Université du Québec.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K. A. (2006). Defining moments in risk communication research: 1996. Journal of Health Communication, 11(1), 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. K. (1999). Megacities and natural disasters: A comparative analysis. GeoJournal, 49, 137–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • November, V. (1994). Risques naturels et croissance urbaine: réflexion théorique sur la nature et le rôle du risque dans l’espace urbain. Revue de Géographie Alpine, 4, 113–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • November, V. (2002). Les territoires du risque: le risque comme objet de réflexion géographique. Bern: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • November, V. (2008). Spatiality of risk. Environment and Planning A, 40, 1523–1527.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2003). Emerging risks in the 21st century: An agenda for action. Paris: OECD Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver-Smith, A. (2004). Theorizing vulnerability in a globalized world: A political ecological perspective. In G. Bankoff, G. Ferks, & D. Hilhorst (Eds.), Mapping vulnerability: Disasters, development and people (pp. 10–24). London: Earthscan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H., & Wynne, B. (1989). Risk communication: Paradigm and paradox. Risk Analysis, 9(2), 141–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papy, F. (Ed.). (2008). Problématiques émergentes dans les sciences de l’information. Paris: Hermès Lavoisier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton, D. (2007). Preparing for natural hazards: The role of community trust. Disaster Prevention Management, 16(3), 370–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton, D. (2008). Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: How trust influences its effectiveness. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8(1/2), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, L. (2005). The value of public participation during a hazard, impact, risk and vulnerability (HIRV) Analysis. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 10, 411–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling, M. (2003). The vulnerability of cities: Natural disasters and social resilience. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (Eds.). (2003). The social amplification of risk. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plough, A., & Krimsky, S. (1987). The emergence of risk communication studies: Social and political context. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 12(3/4), 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2004). Trust, the asymmetry principle, and the role of prior beliefs. Risk Analysis, 24(6), 1475–1486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (1992). Concepts of risk: A classification. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 53–79). London: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (1998). Three decades of risk research: Accomplishments and new challenges. Journal of Risk Research, 1(1), 49–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust in risk communication. In R. E. Kasperson & P. J. M. Stallen (Eds.), Communicating risks to the public (pp. 175–218). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., & Walker, K. D. (Eds.). (2008). Global risk governance: Concept and practice using the IRGC framework (Vol. 1). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, H., Quarantelli, E. L., & Dynes, R. R. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of disaster research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schillmeier, M., & Pohler, W. (2006). Cosmo-political events. Towards the Topology of SARS. Soziale Welt, 57(4), 331–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierra Club. (2006). Harmful legacy of pollution and deception at ground zero: How post 9/11 disaster policy endangers America. New York: Sierra Club.

    Google Scholar 

  • Super, C. M., & Harkness, S. (1997). The cultural structuring of child development. In J. W. Berry, P. R. Dasen, & T. Saraswathi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 2–39). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suraud, M.-G. (2007). La catastrophe d’AZF. De la concertation à la contestatio. Paris: La Documentation française.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suraud, M.-G., Blin, M. P., & De Terssac, G. (Eds.). (2008). Information, Communication, sur les Risques Industriels. Toulouse: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société de Toulouse – Octarès.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor-Goody, P., & Zinn, J. (2006). Current directions in risk research: New developments in psychology and sociology. Risk Analysis, 26, 397–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomalla, F., Downing, T., Spanger-Siegfried, E., Han, G. Y., & Rockstrom, J. (2006). Reducing hazard vulnerability: Towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. Disasters, 30(1), 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, K. J. (2007). From the margins to the mainstream? Disaster research at the crossroads. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 503–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., et al. (2003). A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. [Article]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(14), 8074–8079.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uexküll, Jakob von. 1980 [1920]. Kompositionslehre der Natur. Frankfurt am Main: Thure von Uexküll.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Secretariat). (2009). Global assessment on disaster risk reduction. Geneva: United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR. (2009). UNISDR terminology on disaster risk reduction. Geneva: United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinck, D. (1995). Sociologie des sciences. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams-Jones, B., & Graham, J. E. (2003). Actor-network theory: A tool to support ethical analysis of commercial genetic testing. New Genetics and Society, 22(3), 271–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. (2004). At risk. Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). May the sheep safely graze? In S. Lash et al. (Eds.), Risk, environment & modernity. towards a new ecology (pp. 44–83). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. (1981). When rational men fall sick: An inquiry into some assumptions made by medical anthropologists. Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry, 5, 317–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. (1982). Rational men and the explanatory model approach. Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry, 6, 57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeigler, D. J., Johnson, J. H. J., & Brunn, S. D. (1983). Technological hazards. Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS Laboratoire Techniques Territoires et Société (LATTS), Paris, France

    Valerie November

  2. Laboratoire Psychologie et Cultures, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Yvan Leanza

Authors
  1. Valerie November
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yvan Leanza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

November, V., Leanza, Y. (2015). Risk and Information: For a New Conceptual Framework. In: Risk, Disaster and Crisis Reduction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08542-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation