Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics

Abstract

In this contribution, the most important developments in risk theory and risk ethics are presented and connected with key issues in the debate on global bioethics. First, a short historical sketch of the development of the fairly young field of risk ethics is provided. This is followed by an exploration of concepts and notions of risk and related notions of uncertainty and ignorance. This discussion is based on work in decision theory, epistemology, and philosophy of science. The main body of this contribution focuses on the link between risk and global bioethics. It starts with a discussion of the role of risk and uncertainty in global bioethics in general. It then discusses values and moral emotions in global bioethics, building on insights from risk perception research. The last section explores the complex interrelationships between risk and responsibility in the context of global bioethics.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anand, S., Peter, F., & Sen, A. (2006). Public health, ethics and equity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (1996). Decision-making under great uncertainty. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 26, 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillerbrand, R. (2010a). On non-propositional aspects in modeling complex systems. Analyse & Kritik, 32, 107–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillerbrand, R. (2010b). Unintended consequences and risky technologies. A virtue ethical approach to the moral problems caused by genetic engineering. In D. Pavlich (Ed.), Environmental justice and global citizenship (pp. 167–183). Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky, S., & Golding, D. (Eds.). (1992). Social theories of risk. Westport: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1990). Technology, environment, and social risk: A systems perspective. Organization and Environment, 4, 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nihlén Fahlquist, J. (2006). Responsibility ascriptions and public health problems. Who is responsible for obesity and lung cancer? Journal of Public Health, 14(1), 15–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nihlén Fahlquist, J. (2009). Moral responsibility for environmental problems – Individual or institutional? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 22(2), 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeser, S. (2012). Moral emotions as guide to acceptable risk. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, M. Peterson, & P. Sandin (Eds.), Handbook of risk theory (pp. 819–832). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roeser, S., & Todd, C. (Eds.). (2014). Emotion and value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roeser, S., Hillerbrand, R., Peterson, M., & Sandin, P. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of risk theory. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette, K. (1991). Risk and rationality: Philosophical foundations for populist reforms. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • Asveld, L., & Roeser, S. (Eds.). (2009). The ethics of technological risk. London: Earthscan/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., & Kadvany, J. (2011). Risk: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewens, T. (Ed.). (2007). Risk: Philosophical perspectives. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roeser, S. (Ed.). (2010). Emotions and risky technologies. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophy Department, TU Delft, Delft, Netherlands

    Sabine Roeser & Jessica Nihlén Fahlquist

  2. Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Jessica Nihlén Fahlquist

  3. Institut für Technikfolgenabschätzung und Systemanalyse (ITAS), Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), Karlstr. 11, D- 76133 , Karlsruhe, Germany

    Rafaela Hillerbrand

Authors
  1. Sabine Roeser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica Nihlén Fahlquist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rafaela Hillerbrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sabine Roeser .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Duquesne University Center for Healthcare Ethics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    Henk ten Have

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Roeser, S., Nihlén Fahlquist, J., Hillerbrand, R. (2015). Risk. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_388-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_388-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05544-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation