Levels of Uncertainty

  • Hauke Riesch


There exist a variety of different understandings, definitions, and classifications of risk, which can make the resulting landscape of academic literature on the topic seem somewhat disjointed and often confusing. In this chapter, I will introduce a map on how to think about risks, and in particular uncertainty, which is arranged along the different questions of what the different academic disciplines find interesting about risk. This aims to give a more integrated idea of where the different literatures intersect and thus provide some order in our understanding of what risk is and what is interesting about it. One particular dimension will be presented in more detail, answering the question of what exactly we are uncertain about and distinguishing between five different levels of uncertainty. I will argue, through some concrete examples, that concentrating on the objects of uncertainty can give us an appreciation on how different perspectives on a given risk scenario are formed and will use the more general map to show how this perspective intersects with other classifications and analyses of risk.


Risk Assessment Carbon Capture Bowel Cancer Risk Situation Risk Scenario 
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. Aven T, Renn O (2009) On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain. J Risk Res 12(11):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailer-Jones DM (2003) Scientists’ thoughts on scientific models. Perspect Sci 10:275–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck U (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell S, Currie G (2006) Against beck: in defence of risk analysis. Philos Soc Sci 36(2):149–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlyle T (1871) Oliver cromwell’s letters and speeches: with elucidations. Scribner, Welford, New York. Accessed 1 Sep 2010
  6. Douglas M (1992) Risk and blame. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards A, Elwy G, Covey J, Matthews E, Pill R (2001) Presenting risk information – a review of the effects of “framing” and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun 6:61–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. European Union (2010) Implementation of directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storage of carbon dioxide. Accessed 31 Dec 2010
  9. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1990) Uncertainty and quality in science for public policy. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25:739–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Giddens A (1999) Risk and responsibility. Mod Law Rev 62:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gigerenzer G (2002) Reckoning with risk. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Gillies D (2000) Philosophical theories of probability. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Greenpeace (2008) False hope: why carbon capture and storage won’t save the climate. Greenpeace International, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  15. Hacking I (1975) The emergence of probability. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Hillerbrand R (2009) Epistemic uncertainties in climate predictions. A challenge for practical decision making. Intergenerational Just Rev 9(3):94–99Google Scholar
  17. Hoeting J, Madigan D, Raftery A, Volinsky CT (1999) Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial. Stat Sci 14:382–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hogg MA (2007) Social identity and the group context of trust: managing risk and building trust through belonging. In: Gutscher H, Siegrist M, Earle TC (eds) Trust in cooperative risk management. Earthscan, London, pp 51–72Google Scholar
  19. Itaoka K, Saito A, Akai M (2004) Public acceptance of CO2 capture and storage technology: a survey of public opinion to explore influential factors. In: Rubin ES, Keith DW, Gilboy CF (eds) Proceedings of 7th international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies, 31 volume 1: Peer-reviewed papers and plenary presentations, IEA Greenhouse Gas Program, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  20. Jasanoff S (2003) Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 41:223–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jaspers A (2009) Slapen met de ramen dicht. Natuur-Wetenschap & Techniek (NWT) 77(4):24–33Google Scholar
  22. Jaspers A (2010) The view from technological journalism. FENCO workshop “CCS and public engagement”, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  23. Joffe H (1999) Risk and “the other”. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keynes JM (1937) The general theory. Q J Econ 51:209–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Knight FH (1971) Risk, uncertainty and profit (reprint of the 1921 edn). University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  26. Lahsen M (2005) Seductive simulations? Uncertainty distribution around climate models. Soc Stud Sci 35(6):895–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mander S, Polson D, Roberts T, Curtis A (2010) Risk from CO2 storage in saline aquifers: a comparison of lay and expert perceptions of risk. GHGT10, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  28. Moscovici S (2000) Social representations. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Norton J, Brown J, Mysiak J (2006) To what extent, and how, might uncertainty be defined? Comments engendered by “Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support”: Walker et al., Integrated Assessment 4: 1, 2003. Integrated Ass J 6(1):83–88Google Scholar
  30. Ravetz JR (2006) Post-normal science and the complexity of transitions towards sustainability. Ecol Complex 3:275–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raza Y (2009) Uncertainty analysis of capacity estimates and leakage potential for geologic storage of carbon dioxide in saline aquifers. Masters Thesis, MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Renn O, Klinke A (2004) Systemic risks: a new challenge for risk management. EMBO Rep 5(S1):S41–S46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Riesch H, Reiner D (submitted) Different levels of uncertainty in carbon capture and storageGoogle Scholar
  34. Riesch H, Spiegelhalter DJ (2011) “Careless pork costs lives”: risk stories from science to press release to media“. Health Risk Soc 13(1):47–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roeser S (2009) The relation between cognition and affect in moral judgments about risk. In: Asveld L, Roeser S (eds) The ethics of technological risk. Earthscan, London, pp 182–201Google Scholar
  36. Roeser S (2010) Intuitions, emotions an gut reactions in decisions about risks: towards a different interpretation of “neuroethics”. J Risk Res 13(2):175–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rumsfeld D (2002) News Transcript. riptid=2636. Accessed 3 Dec 2010
  38. Schneider SH, Turner BL, Garriga HM (1998) Imaginable surprise in global change science. J Risk Res 1(2):165–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shackley S, Wynne B (1996) Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: boundary-ordering devices and authority. Sci Technol Hum Val 21(3):275–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Slovic P (2000) The perception of risk. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, MacGregor D (2004) Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk and rationality. Risk Anal 24(2):311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sorensen R (2009) Epistemic paradoxes. In: Zalta E (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Accessed 31 Dec 2010
  43. Spiegelhalter DJ (2010) Quantifying uncertainty. In: Paper presented at “Handling uncertainty in science”, Royal Society, London, 22–23 Mar 2010Google Scholar
  44. Spiegelhalter DJ, Pearson M (2008) 2845 ways to spin the risk. Accessed 31 Dec 2010
  45. Spiegelhalter DJ, Riesch H (in press) Don’t know, can’t know: embracing scientific uncertainty when analysing risks. Philos T Roy Soc AGoogle Scholar
  46. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. Stirling A (2007) Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. EMBO Rep 8(4):309–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sunstein CR (2005) Laws of fear. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tajfel H (1981) Human groups and social categories: studies in social psychology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Taleb N (2007) The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Upham P, Riesch H, Tomei, J Thornley P (2011) The sustainability of woody biomass supply for UK bioenergy: a post-normal approach to environmental risk and uncertainty. Environ Sci Policy 14(5):510–518Google Scholar
  52. van Asselt MBA, Rotmans J (2002) Uncertainty in integrated assessment modelling: from positivism to pluralism. Clim Change 54:75–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Walker WE, Harremoes P, Rotmans J, van der Sluijs JP, van Asselt MBA, Janssen P, Krayer von Krauss MP (2003) Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integrat Ass 4(1):5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Washer P (2004) Representations of SARS in the British newspapers. Soc Sci Med 59:2561–2571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. WCRF (2007a) Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: a global perspective. WCRF, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  56. WCRF (2007b) Landmark report: Excess body fat causes cancer. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  57. WCRF (2007c) Media quotes. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  58. Wynne B (1992) Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environ Chang 2(2):111–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Judge Business SchoolUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations