Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Critique of the Social Amplification of Risk Framework from the Power Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Power and Risk in Policymaking

Abstract

The social amplification of risk framework is an influential framework in the field of risk communication. It provides a useful lens to examine how a risk argument becomes amplified in a policy context, and it is therefore central to this book. This chapter provides an account of the social amplification of risk framework and explores key concepts within the literature that inform the critique of the framework. Specifically, this chapter teases out the role of power and expertise, and then communication and trust in shaping the social amplification (or attenuation) of public health risk and safety.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 69.99
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

References

  • Adekola, J., Fischbacher-Smith, M., Fischbacher-Smith, D., & Adekola, O. (2017). Health risks from environmental degradation in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35, 334–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adekola, J., Fischbacher-Smith, D., & Fischbacher-Smith, M. (2018). Light me up: Power and expertise in risk communication and policy-making in the e-cigarette health debates. Journal of Risk Research, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56, 947–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, W. J., Slovic, P., Kasperson, R. E., Kasperson, J. X., Renn, O., & Emani, S. (1993). Incorporating structural models into research on the social amplification of risk: Implications for theory construction and decision making. Risk Analysis, 13, 611–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1984). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. ACR North American Advances.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casiday, R. E. (2005). Risk conceptualisations, trust and decision-making in the face of contradictory information: The case of MMR. Durham: Durham University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S. R. (1989). Frameworks of power. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D., & Reeve, C. (1986). Science speaks to power: The role of experts in policy making. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earle, T., & Siegrist, M. (2008). Trust, confidence and cooperation model: A framework for understanding the relation between trust and risk perception. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fellenor, J., Barnett, J., Potter, C., Urquhart, J., Mumford, J., & Quine, C. P. (2018). Ash dieback and other tree pests and pathogens: Dispersed risk events and the social amplification of risk framework. Journal of Risk Research, 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher-Smith, D. (2012). Getting pandas to breed: Paradigm blindness and the policy space for risk prevention, mitigation and management. Risk Management, 14, 177–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher-Smith, D., Irwin, A., & Fischbacher-Smith, M. (2010). Bringing light to the shadows and shadows to the light: Risk, risk management, and risk communication. In P. Bennet, K. Calman, S. Curtis, & D. Fischbacher-Smith (Eds.), Risk communication and public health (pp. 23–38). Oxford University Press: Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562848.003.02. ISBN 9780199562848.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, J., Burns, W., Mertz, C. K., & Slovic, P. (1992). Trust as a determinant of opposition to a high-level radioactive waste repository: Analysis of a structural model. Risk analysis, 12(3), 417–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: Volume I. An Introduction. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudenburg, W. R. (1993). Risk and recreancy: Weber, the division of labor, and the rationality of risk perceptions. Social Forces, 71, 909–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frewer, L. J. (2003). Trust, transparency, and social context: Implications for social amplification of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frewer, L. J., Scholderer, J., & Bredahl, L. (2003). Communicating about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods: The mediating role of trust. Risk Analysis, 23, 1117–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabarro, J. J. (1978). The development of trust, influence, and expectations. In Interpersonal behavior: Communication and understanding in relationships (pp. 290–303). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabler, N., & Katz, D. (2010). Contraband tobacco in Canada: Tax policies and black market incentives. Vancouver: Fraser Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1979). Agency, structure. In Central problems in social theory (pp. 49–95). London: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (1996). Beyond epistemology: Relativism and engagement in the politics of science. Social Studies of Science, 26, 393–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E. (1992). The social amplification of risk: Progress in developing an integrative framework in social theories of risk. Santa Barbara: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E. (2005). Social contours of risk: Publics, risk communication and the social amplification of risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E. (2012). Social contours of risk: Volume I: Publics, risk communication and the social. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., & Kasperson, J. X. (1996). The social amplification and attenuation of risk. In The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (pp. 95–105). Thousand Oaks: Sage. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002716296545001010

  • Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8, 177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D., & Tuler, S. (1992). Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 161–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjærnes, U., Harvey, M., & Warde, A. (2007). Trust in food: A comparative and institutional analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. The Communication of Ideas, 37, 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löfstedt, R. E., & Horlick-Jones, T. (1999). Environmental regulation in the UK: Politics, institutional change and public trust. In Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 73–88). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Machlis, G. E., & Rosa, E. A. (1990). Desired risk: Broadening the social amplification of risk Framework. Risk Analysis, 10, 161–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (2006). Agenda setting. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masuda, J. R., & Garvin, T. (2006). Place, culture, and the social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 26, 437–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metz, W. C. (1996). Historical application of a social amplification of risk model: Economic impacts of risk events at nuclear weapons facilities. Risk Analysis, 16, 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morganstern, A. (2016). The interaction of emotion and gender on the social amplification of risk: Why Twitter? Eugene: University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pender, S. (2001). Managing incomplete knowledge: Why risk management is not sufficient. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J., Horlick-Jones, T., Murdock, G., Hargreaves, D., McLachlan, S., & Lofstedt, R. (2001). Social amplification of risk: The media and the public. Sudbury: HSE Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N. (1999). Risk communication and the social amplification of risk: Theory, evidence and policy implications. Risk Decision and Policy, 4, 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., & Barnett, J. (2013). Chalara and the social amplification of risk. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., & Henwood, K. (2010). The social amplification of risk framework (SARF): Theory, critiques, and policy implications. In P. Bennett, K. Calman, S. Curtis, & D. Fischbacher-Smith (Eds.), Risk communication and public health (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (2007). Organised uncertainty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2011). The social amplification/attenuation of risk framework: Application to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 154–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust in risk communication. In Communicating risks to the public (pp. 175–217). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., Burns, W. J., Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (1992). The social amplification of risk: Theoretical foundations and empirical applications. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 137–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E. (1961). Two-way communication channels. In Proceedings of 4th Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, 1961, USA (pp. 611–644). Berkeley: Statistical Laboratory of the University of California.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (2015). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegrist, M., Earle, T. C., & Gutscher, H. (2003). Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Analysis, 23, 705–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13, 675–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. (1988). Corporate power, risk assessment and the control of major hazards: A study of Canvey Island and Ellesmere Port. Manchester: University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. (1990). Corporate power, risk assessment and the control of major hazards: A study of Canvey Island and Ellesmere Port. PhD dissertation, University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steven, L. (1974). Power: A radical view. London/New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK

    Josephine Adekola

Authors
  1. Josephine Adekola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josephine Adekola .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Adekola, J. (2020). A Critique of the Social Amplification of Risk Framework from the Power Perspective. In: Power and Risk in Policymaking. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19314-0_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation