EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Defining the acceptable level of risk for civil protection purposes: a behavioral perspective on the decision process

Daniela Di Bucci () and Lucia Savadori
Additional contact information
Daniela Di Bucci: Presidency of the Council of Ministers
Lucia Savadori: University of Trento

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, 2018, vol. 90, issue 1, No 14, 293-324

Abstract: Abstract This work analyzes how acceptable risk levels are determined in political decisions and related policies in the field of civil protection, i.e., regarding disaster risks and their reduction at the national and supranational level. We examined why establishing the acceptable level of risk is a political decision, and why this decision is not an easy task. Some behavioral elements which can de facto impede such a decision were recognized. Among these, the anomalies inherent in intertemporal choices, availability heuristic and mental accounting play a primary role, because they interfere with preferences for selfish versus others’ interests and with the evaluation of individual versus community gains and losses. Due to these processes, the political decision-maker, unless she is a statesperson, will easily prefer not to decide. Political decision-making, however, could be induced by a change of mind in the voters’ community. This reorientation of the society’s values and interests can be stimulated taking advance from research on social norms, which underlines the role played by some people that drive innovation in a community, e.g., the trendsetters. The scientific, technical and professional communities have the knowledge needed, are aware of the work to be done on the disaster risk reduction and can establish a direct relationship with single trendsetters and statespersons to promote decision-making on disaster risk reduction. Within this relationship, they can build trust, give advice and participate in in-depth discussions. In this interaction and collaboration, behavioral sciences can provide a valuable support for a better reciprocal understanding.

Keywords: Risk; Disaster risk reduction; Political decision-making; Risk perception; Intertemporal choices; Social norms (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-017-3046-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:90:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-017-3046-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11069

DOI: 10.1007/s11069-017-3046-5

Access Statistics for this article

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards is currently edited by Thomas Glade, Tad S. Murty and Vladimír Schenk

More articles in Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards from Springer, International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:90:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-017-3046-5