Search results

Purpose: Risk is a multifaceted concept, and its identification requires complex approaches that are often misunderstood. The consequence is that decisions are based on limited perception rather than the full value and meaning of what risk is, as a result, the way it is being tackled is incorrect. The individuals are often limited in their perceptions and ideas and do not embrace the full multifaceted nature of risk. Regulators and individuals want to follow norms and checklists or overuse models, simulations, and templates, thereby reducing responsibility for decision-making. At the same time, the wider use of technology and rules reduces the critical thinking of individuals. We advance the automation process by building robots that follow protocols and forget about the part of risk assessment that cannot be programed. Therefore, with this study, the objective of this study was to discover how people define risk, the influencing factors of risk perception and how they behave toward this perception. The authors also determine how the perception differed with age, gender, marital status, education level and region. The novelty of the research is related to individual risk perception during COVID-19, as this is a new and unknown phenomenon. Methodology: The research is based on the analysis of the self-administered purposely designed questionnaires we distributed across different social media platforms between February and June 2020 in Europe and in some cases was carried out as a interview over communication platforms such as “Skype,” “Zoom” and “Microsoft Teams.” The questionnaire was divided into four parts: Section 1 was designed to collect demographic information from the participants; Section 2 included risk definition statements obtained from literature and a preliminary discussion with peers; Section 3 included risk behavior statements; and Section 4 included statements on risk perception experiences. A five-point Likert Scale was provided, and participants were required to answer along a scale of “1” for “Strongly Agree” to “5” for “Strongly Disagree.” Participants also had the option to elaborate further and provide additional comments in an open-ended box provided at the end of the section. 466 valid responses were received. Thematic analysis was carried out to analyze the interviews and the open-ended questions, while the questionnaire responses were analyzed using various quantitative methods on IBM SPSS (version 23). Findings: The results of the analysis indicate that individuals evaluate the risk before making a decision and view risk as both a loss and opportunity. The study identifies nine factors influencing risk perception. Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that we can continue to develop models and rules, but as long as the risk is not understood, we will never achieve anything.

This research explores the implications for risk management of “People Risk.” In particular how online digital behaviors, particularly from young people entering the workplace for the first time, might impact on the work setting and how risk management might mitigate impact on the employee and organization.

A mixed methods approach was used to consider these implications and draws from a number of data sources in the United Kingdom including a database of self-review data around online safety policy and practice from over 2000 schools, a survey of over 1000 14–16 year olds and their attitudes toward sexting, and a survey of over 500 undergraduate students. In addition the work considers existing risk management approaches and the models therein and how they might be applied to people risk.

The dataset analyzed in this exploration show an education system in the United Kingdom that is not adequately preparing young people with an awareness of the implications of digital behavior in their lives and the survey data shows distorted social norms that might have serious consequences in the workplace.

This research should raise concerns for managers in the workplace who need to be aware of the changes in “normal” behavior and how these potentially harmful practices may be mitigated in the workplace.

The research provides a strong evidence base for a change in “acceptable” social behavior by children and young people alongside an education system not promoting effective awareness. These two datasets combined highlight potential new risks to the workplace.

Protection motivation theory (PMT) explains that the intention to cope with information security risks is based on informed threat and coping appraisals. However, people cannot always make appropriate assessments due to possible ignorance and cognitive biases. This study proposes a research model that introduces four antecedent factors from ignorance and bias perspectives into the PMT model and empirically tests this model with data from a survey of electronic waste (e-waste) handling.

The data collected from 356 Chinese samples are analyzed via structural equation modeling (SEM).

The results revealed that for threat appraisal, optimistic bias leads to a lower perception of risks. However, factual ignorance (lack of knowledge of risks) does not significantly affect the perceived threat. For coping appraisal, practical ignorance (lack of knowledge of coping with risks) leads to low response efficacy and self-efficacy and high perceptions of coping cost, but the illusion of control overestimates response efficacy and self-efficacy.

First, this study addresses a new type of information security problem in e-waste handling. Second, this study extends the PMT model by exploring the roles of ignorance and bias as antecedents. Finally, the authors reinvestigate the basic constructs of PMT to identify how rational threat and coping assessments affect user intentions to cope with data security risks.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce an analytical framework to define and interpret heterogenous risk behaviour within communities facing natural hazard. By employing a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, the paper presents a categorization of “risk-styles” that are commonly used by Jakartan riverbank settlers facing recurrent risk. Unlike the more common concept of “flood-coping strategies”, the notion of risk-styles extends the analysis of responses directly related to floods and involves a broader set of risk and poverty practices. The proposed analytical framework is likely to be useful for future research on the topic of understanding heterogenous risk behaviour, particularly for systemic comparisons of human responses to natural hazard in other parts of the world.

The data underlying this paper were obtained during a year of extensive anthropological fieldwork in 2010 and 2011, in one of the most flood-prone riverbank settlements in Jakarta, Indonesia. A combination of qualitative and quantitative methods were used to obtain data in the field, while the analyses of risk-styles was based on quantitative and qualitative analyses of the survey results and narratives of the respondents of the study.

This paper defines and analyses four risk-handling styles that are commonly used by inhabitants of a flood-prone riverbank settlement in Jakarta (called Bantaran Kali in this paper) to handle recurrent flood risk. These risk-styles are not completely fixed over time; in particular circumstances, people may and do change their risk-style. However, they should not be considered random or ad hoc. Instead, the study shows how these risk-styles reflect practices that gradually develop during people’s lives in a highly uncertain living environment (characterized by flood risk and poverty-related risks), and are more or less consistently used over longer periods of time and in relation to different types of risk and uncertainty. The paper argues that the four risk-styles described are influenced by factors that may seem unrelated to flood risk at first sight, such as trust in other actors and the government, networks and socializing skills, and the opportunities and limitations that are shaped by the economic and political structures in which riverbank settlers live.

This paper takes a bottom-up perspective and sheds light on the perceptions of a group of marginalized riverbank settlers on the risk of floods. By introducing the notion of risk-styles, it adds nuanced and empirical data that were obtained during extensive fieldwork to the debate on understanding heterogeneous risk behaviour. The originality of the paper lies in the combined use of qualitative and quantitative tools that were used to categorize common risk-styles as well as in the proposed analyses for defining and understanding heterogeneous risk behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to challenge the idea that poor people are generally risk averse and that risks are predominately created by structural conditions and outside forces (Wisner et al., 2004, p. 11; Cardona, 2004, p. 39). It aims to show that some categories of poor people regularly take risks and that they can have good reasons for that. For people living at the edge of Indonesian society, taking risks on a regular basis has become something normal. The possibility that people can actively involve themselves in risky practices needs to be taken into account in risk assessments by government and civil society.

The material presented in this paper has been collected during long, intermittent periods of ethnographic fieldwork in East Java and East Kalimantan between 1999 and 2014. The data were mostly collected “at the side” of research on poverty, social security, social welfare and livelihood security. It also makes use of a case study on oplosan in Pati, Central Java, written by Frans Hüsken, of newspaper reports, online sources, talks with police officers and online news items.

In many of the current day risk studies, livelihood risks of the poor are perceived as “externally induced” resulting from outside influences such as disasters, living at dangerous places or as resulting from structural factors such as social and economic inequality. Little attention has been paid to poor and vulnerable people who actively take risks themselves and the reasons to do this. Based on ethnographic fieldwork in Java and East Kalimantan, Indonesia, in this paper some risky practices of poor (young) people are explored. Examples are several forms of extreme risk-taking such as drinking parties with potent or even poisonous mixtures (oplosan), gambling and competition (often referred to as trek-trekan).

So far, little attention has been paid to the fact that people often actively involve in risks and deliberately may opt for risky lifestyles and opt to live in risky environments as this offers opportunities for poor people to gain money, prestige and jobs otherwise not accessible.

The transcript is of one from a number of interviews with disaster risk reduction (DRR) “pioneers” carried out in 2022 as a part of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) project to record the history of the field. It aims to enable one of the “pioneers” to explain his role in the emergence of disaster studies and provide critical commentary on what he considers is wrong with current DRR approaches.

Terry Cannon was interviewed to explain the beginnings of his involvement in disasters research and to comment on his views on progress in the field of disaster risk reduction since his early work in the 1980s. The transcript and video were developed in the context of the UNDRR project on the history of DRR.

The interview provides an account of the origins of the book “At Risk” and why it was considered necessary. This is put into the context of how the field of DRR has emerged since the 1980s. It elicits opinions on what he considers the gaps in both his early work (especially in the book “At Risk” of which he was a co-author) and in the field of DRR recently.

It provides historical context on how early disaster research developed the alternative framework of “social construction” of disasters, in opposition to the idea that they are “natural”. It challenges some of the approaches that have emerged as DRR and has been institutionalised, including its increasing difficulty in supporting the ideas of social construction.

Multimedia content that is accessible through mobile devices has a larger size than other types of content (e.g. text, images). This may lead to higher prices for accessing the content via mobile devices, as mobile operators are capping mobile data billing plans in an effort to increase their revenues and prevent congestion. This poses problems for the users that are not willing/do not afford to pay the required price but still want to use multimedia content through the mobile networks. A price reduction for the user, as well as minimising bandwidth consumption can be obtained as a trade-off in multimedia quality. However, as previous research shows, not all people are willing to trade-off quality for a lower price; therefore, there is no straightforward approach to this problem. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to present a model of user willingness to pay for multimedia content quality as a function of the user risk attitude with the aim to provide personalised content depending on the user willingness to trade-off price for multimedia content quality.

A user model was proposed based on a literature review and an existing data set. A stereotypical approach was used where users are divided in two groups: risk averse and risk seekers. An experimental study involving six scenarios was used to validate the findings.

The results of the evaluation show that for the proposed user risk model, risk seekers preferred to pay for multimedia quality, whereas risk adverse users preferred to switch to a lower multimedia quality when monetary cost is involved. However, when the mobile data billing plan had the bandwidth limited, rather than a higher price to be paid when the bundle quantity was exceeded, the risk averse people’s preference for a lower quality still holds, but it does not show that most of the risk seekers prefer to pay for the multimedia quality.

This paper adds to the state of the art by providing a novel way to model the user preferences for multimedia quality based on their attitude towards risk, age, and gender.

Mobile data users, content providers (application service providers, over-the-top providers), mobile network operators (MNOs) and internet service providers (ISPs) could benefit from the results of this research. For mobile data users, the outcome of this research could be beneficial, as they can obtain personalised content based on their needs. From the content providers’ point of view, providing personalised content can lead to more satisfied users. It could also reduce the bandwidth consumption and the traffic to the server and/or proxy. Reducing the bandwidth consumption could lead to the possibility to acquire more customers and hence increase the revenues.

This is among the first studies to assess how the user preference towards multimedia quality if affected by the user attitude towards risk.

The purpose of this paper is to summarise the current state of empirical knowledge pertaining to online risk and cybercrime relating to people with intellectual disabilities (ID).

This narrative review summarises, synthesises and critically evaluates the current literature and state of knowledge and offers suggestions for extending current knowledge and practice.

Evidence regarding risk for people with ID is limited but growing. Existing findings highlight that: risk may increase contingent upon higher levels of sociability, loneliness, anxiety and depression, poorer insight, judgement, discrimination and ability to detect deception online and reduced experience and life opportunities; people without ID perceive high online risk for people with ID, which may lead to gatekeeping restrictions and controlling digital access; restriction may potentially impede online self-determination, participation and development by people with ID; and experience of risk may enhance awareness, independence and resilience in managing future online risk amongst people with ID. Further research work is needed in this area to enhance understanding of risk experience and effective support strategies.

This review of current knowledge has highlighted the necessity for more research to better understand the propensity for engagement in different risky online behaviours and to better inform support practices to help people with ID to manage risk whilst maintaining digital inclusion.

This paper aims to critically assess digital finance as a pro-poor intervention in the development finance space.

Using critical policy discourse analysis, this paper explains the turn from microfinance to digital finance, and thereafter discusses four issues: the lack of evidence that digital finance for poor people actually promotes socioeconomic development; the risks that poor people are exposed to, which arises from their exposure to digital finance technology; the lack of evidence that digital finance actually brings poor people immediate benefits; and the weak business rationale for digital finance.

The expectation for digital finance serving as a major pro-poor private sector intervention lacks justification.

The paper reflects on the effect of digital finance for poor people.