Combining risk perception and risk attitude:
Integrating quantitative and qualitative methods for building a
comprehensive individual risk behaviour model
Frankwin van Winsen, Erwin Wauters, Ludwig Lauwers, Steven Van Passel
Trento, 21st October 2010
Workshop Risk Elicitation and Stated Preference Methods for Climate Change Research
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research
Social Sciences Unit
www.ilvo.vlaanderen.be
Agriculture and Fisheries Policy Area
Overview of the presentation
• Risk paradigms
• Risk and agriculture
• Research on individual risk behaviour
– Risk attitude
– Risk perception
•
•
•
•
First Conclusions
A basic model for individual risk behaviour
Building further on the model (participatory approach)
Discussion & Questions
2
Risk paradigms
• Risk is about uncertainty and
consequences
• Different views on risk
– Constructivism and Risk: Risk is a social
construct inseparable from social and cultural
processes.
– Real Risk, risk is objectively measurable
– Subjective interpretation, risk is objectively
measurable however personal interpretation
3
Risk and agriculture
• Climate
– Caused by: storms, hail, rain, floods, droughts,
diseases
– Effects: Yield risks and price risk
• Policy
– Regulation
– Cap transforms
• Market
– Internationalisation of markets
– Increased price volatility: both input as output
prices
4
Research on risk behaviour
• Most common determinant on individual risk
behaviour is risk attitude:
Most measures derived from expected utility:
•Risk Attitude
•Relative Risk Attitude
•Perceived Risk Attitude
5
Research on risk behaviour
Current research on perception:
• Most
commonParadigm
determinant on individual risk
• Psychometric
• Cultural Theory
behaviour
is risk attitude:
Social Amplification
ofgamble
risk
– • Attitude
derived from
experiments
– Attitude seen as stable personality trait
Important message:
– Risk
No determinants
for risk behaviour
other
attitude
perception is influenced
by more than
justthan
an imperfect
– knowledge
Behaviourtransfer
optimalization
risk attitude
from real given
risk information
• However
– Risk attitude is context specific
– Risk perception should be taken into account
– Risk attitude is manegable and should be optimalised given
a wanted behaviour
– Integrated model by Pablo and Sitkin
6
Some conclusions
• When investigating individual risk
behaviour:
– See risk attitude as a context specific and
a manageable trait in order to optimalize
behaviour
– Take risk perception influenced by social
and cultural determinants into account
together with risk attitude.
7
An example
• A day at the horse races:
– Observation: Gamblers that lose during the day in the
end of the day start betting on long shots.
– Explanation: Not risk attitude changes but the
perception of the gamblers on who the winning horses
are.
• Feedbacks:
– To: Attitude and Perception
– To: knowledge on the real risk
– Risk management
8
A basic individual risk behaviour model
Real Risk
Mental
Model
Information transfer of real risk
Perceived
Risk
Perceived risk more than information transfer of the real risk:
• Social and cultural factors
• Personality / Motivation
• Habbits
• Perceived Behavioural Control
9
A basic individual risk behaviour model
Perceived
Risk
Risk
Attitude
Risk Management
Mental
Model
Change in MM
Newly learned Information about the real risk
Real Risk
Risk
Behaviour
Risk
Outcome
10
Building further on the model
• Research is needed to build on this model:
– Using a participatory approach actively involving farmers in
building on the model
– Integrating qualitative and quantitative research
11
Thank you for your attention!
Frankwin van Winsen (frankwin.vanwinsen@ilvo.vlaanderen.be)
Trento, 21st October 2010
Workshop Risk Elicitation and Stated Preference Methods for Climate Change Research
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research
Social SciencesUnit
www.ilvo.vlaanderen.be
Agriculture and Fisheries Policy Area