A case study demonstrates a democratic methodology for making risk based decisions

Risk is a subjective notion, but the limits between our role as risk practitioners and decision makers can become blurred. A belief that the public misunderstands risk and the need to control the process are two barriers to effective engagement. We believe that a lack of engagement and the ability to enable citizens to decide their own future can contribute to the controversy we see on important public debates. In our study, using an existing risk assessment and decision, we survey four stakeholder groups in New Zealand in order to determine how they rate the costs and benefits. Our survey methodology incorporates a continuous scale along three axes that represent the biophysical outcomes of economic, environmental and human health. This design enables costs and benefits to be traded-off between individuals, giving them a representative voice. We use these results to investigate whether or not it would be feasible to use such an approach in order to make decisions, and what this may mean. Our results indicate that public decision making is possible, and in this case broadly the public view broadly agrees with the official decision. Such an approach holds promise for expanding the role in the risk assessment process.