New Emerging Risks

  • Ortwin Renn
  • Siegfried Radandt
Part of the Topics In Safety, Risk, Reliability And Quality book series (TSRQ, volume 13)

In earlier chapters, mention has been made to some new emerging risks in the changing world of work. Here we give a short list of new risks (Section 5.1), combined with a description of strategies and methods on how to deal with those risks within the Risk Management and Risk Governance process, focussing on the “precautionary principle” (Section 5.2).


Risk Management Precautionary Principle Epistemic Uncertainty Mechatronic System Risk Governance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bruijn HJA, ten Heuvelhof EF (1999) Scientific Expertise in Complex Decision-Making Processes. Science and Public Policy 26(3), 151-161.Google Scholar
  2. Charnley G, Elliott ED (2002) Risk versus Precaution: Environmental Law and Public Health Protection. Environmental Law Reporter 32(2), 10363-10366.Google Scholar
  3. Coglianese C (1997) Assessing Consensus: The Promise and Performance of Negotiated Rulemaking. Duke Law Journal 46, 1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen BL (1991) Catalog of Risks Extended and Updated. Health Physics 61, 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooke RM (1991) Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Cross FB (1996) Paradoxical Perils of the Precautionary Principle. Washington and Lee Law Review 53, 851-925.Google Scholar
  7. Crouch EAC, Wilson R (1984) Inter-Risk-Comparisons. In: Rodricks JV, Tardiff RG (Eds.), Assessment and Management of Chemical Risks. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 97-112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Sadeleer N (2002) Environmental Principles: From Political Slogans to Legal Rules. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Elliott ED (1992) Global Climate Change and Regulatory Uncertainty. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law 9, 259.Google Scholar
  10. Elliot ED, Renn O (in press) Precautionary Regulation of Chemicals in the US and EU. In: Wiener JB, Rogers MD, Sand PH, Hammit JK (Eds.), The Reality of Precaution: Comparing Risk Regulation in the US and Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. European Commission (2002) Treaty Establishing the European Community. Official Journal of the European Commission, C 325, 33-184, 24 December 2002. EU, Brussels. Available online at:
  12. Fisher E (2001) Is the Precautionary Principle Justifiable? Journal of Environmental Law 3, 315-334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisher E (2002) Precaution, Precaution Everywhere: Developing a “Common Understanding” of the Precautionary Principle in the European Community. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 9(1), 7-46.Google Scholar
  14. Funtowicz SO, Shepherd I, Wilkinson D, Ravetz J (2000) Science and Governance in the European Union: A Contribution to the Debate. Science and Public Policy 5(27), 327336.Google Scholar
  15. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1987) The Arithmatics of Uncertainty. Physics Bulletin 38, 412414.Google Scholar
  16. Functowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1992) Three Types of Risk Assessment and the Emergence of Post-Normal Science. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (Eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Praeger, Westport, pp. 251-273.Google Scholar
  17. Gee D, Harremoes P, Keys J, MacGarvin M, Stirling A, Guedes Vaz S, Wynne B (2001) Late Lesson from Early Warnings: The Precautionary Principle 1898-2000. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  18. Harding R, Fisher E (Eds.) (1999) Perspectives on the Precautionary Principle. Federation Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
  19. Harter PJ (1982) Negotiating Regulations: A Cure for Malaise. Georgetown University Law Journal 71, 1.Google Scholar
  20. Kasperson RE, Golding D, Kasperson JX (1999) Risk, Trust and Democratic Theory. In: Cvetkovich G, Löfstedt R (Eds.), Social Trust and the Management of Risk. Earthscan, London, pp. 22-41.Google Scholar
  21. Klinke A, Renn O (2001) Precautionary Principle and Discursive Strategies: Classifying and Managing Risks. Journal of Risk Research 4(2), 159-173.Google Scholar
  22. Laudan L (1996) The Pseudo-Science of Science- The Demise of the Demarcation Problem. In: Laudan L. (Ed.), Beyond Positivism and Relativism. Theory, Method and Evidence. Westview Press, Boulder, pp. 166-192.Google Scholar
  23. Löfstedt RE (2004) The Swing of the Pendulum in Europe: From Precautionary Principle to (Regulatory) Impact Assessment. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies Working Paper 04-07. Kings College, London.Google Scholar
  24. Löfstedt RE (2005) Risk Management in Post-Trust Societies. Palgrave MacMillan, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Majone G (2002) What Price Safety? The Precautionary Principle and Its Policy Implications. Journal of Common Market Studies 40(1), 89-109.Google Scholar
  26. Marchant GE, Mossman KL (2004) Arbitrary and Capricious: The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts. The AEI Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  27. Merkhofer LW (1987) The Use of Risk Comparison to Aid the Communication and Interpretation of the Risk Analyses for Regulatory Decision Making. In: Lave LB (Ed.), Risk Assessment and Management. Plenum, New York, pp. 581-607.Google Scholar
  28. Morgan G, Henrion M (1992) Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  29. Morris J. (Ed.) (2000) Rethinking Risk and the Precautionary Principle. Butterworth Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  30. O’Riordan T, Cameron JC (1994) Interpreting the Precautionary Principle. Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
  31. O’Riordan T, Cameron JC, Jordan A (Eds.) (2001) Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle. Cameron May, London.Google Scholar
  32. Paterson J (2005) Sustainable Development, Sustainable Decisions and the Precautionary Principle. Manuscript, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen.Google Scholar
  33. Peterson M (2003) Transformative Decision Rules. Erkenntnis 58, 71-85.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. Peterson M (2006) The Precautionary Principle Is Incoherent. Risk Analysis 26, 595-601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Raffensberger C, Tickner J (1999) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  36. Renn O (2004) The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management. In: MacDaniels TL, Small MJ (Eds.), Risk Analysis and Society: An Interdisciplinary Characterization of the Field. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 289-366.Google Scholar
  37. Resnik D (2003) Is the Precautionary Principle Unscientific? Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34, 329-344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. RIVM/MNP (2003) Guidance for Uncertainty Assessment and Communication. Report No. NWS-E-2003-163. Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation and Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Utrecht and Bilthoven, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  39. Rose-Ackerman S (1994) Consensus versus Incentives: A Skeptical Look at Regulatory Negotiation. Duke Law Journal 43, 1206-1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sand P (2000) The Precautionary Principle: A European Perspective. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 6(3), 445-458.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. Sandin P, Peterson M, Hansson SO, Rudén C, Juthé A (2002) Five Charges against the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Risk Research 5(4), 287-299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shome N, Cornell CA, Bazzurro P, Carballo JE (1998) Earthquakes, Records and Nonlinear Responses. Earthquake Spectra 14(3), 469-500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stirling A (1999) On “Science” and “Precaution” in the Management of Technological Risk. Volume I: Synthesis Study, Report to the EU Forward Studies Unit by European Science and Technology Observatory (ESTO), EUR19056 EN. IPTS, Sevilla. Available online at:
  44. Stirling A (2003) Risk, Uncertainty and Precaution: Some Instrumental Implications from the Social Sciences. In: Berkhout F, Leach M, Scoones I (Eds.), Negotiating Change. Edward Elgar, London.Google Scholar
  45. Stirling A, Renn O, van Zwanenberg P (2006) A Framework for the Precautionary Governance of Food Safety: Integrating Science and Participation in the Social Appraisal of Risk. In: Fisher E, Jones J, von Schomberg R (Eds.), Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Perspectives and Prospects. Edward Elgar, London.Google Scholar
  46. Stone C (2001) Is There a Precautionary Principle? Environmental Law Reporter 31, 10790.Google Scholar
  47. Trouwborst A (2002) Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law. Kluwer Law International, The Hague.Google Scholar
  48. van Asselt MBA (2000) Perspectives on Uncertainty and Risk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  49. Van Zwanenberg P, Stirling A (2004) Risk and Precaution in the US and Europe. Yearbook of European Environmental Law 3, 43-57.Google Scholar
  50. Viklund M (2002) Risk Policy: Trust, Risk Perception, and Attitudes. Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  51. Vlek CA (1996) A Multi-Level, Multi-Stage and Multi-Attribute Perspective on Risk Assessment. Decision-Making and Risk Control. Risk, Decision, and Policy 1, 9-31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ortwin Renn
    • 1
  • Siegfried Radandt
    1. 1.Technical UniversityGermany

    Personalised recommendations