Risk science has a unified foundation, perspective article argues

Is the study of risk a single science, or should it be understood as a collection of “risk sciences” spread across many fields? A new perspective article published in Risk Sciences addresses this foundational question and argues that risk science already has a distinct and unified knowledge base.

The article, written by Terje Aven of the University of Stavanger, responds to the recent launch of the journal Risk Sciences and its use of the plural term “sciences”. While the plural form emphasizes the many disciplines involved in studying risk and uncertainty, Aven argues that it may understate the progress already made in establishing risk science as a coherent field.

The paper explains that risk analysis has developed through the Society for Risk Analysis tradition as both a discipline and a science. This tradition covers core areas such as risk fundamentals, risk assessment, risk perception and communication, risk management and governance, and real-world problem-solving.

A central point in the article is the distinction between generic risk science and applied risk science. Generic risk science develops the concepts, principles, theories, models, frameworks, approaches, and methods used to understand, assess, communicate, and manage risk. Applied risk science uses this foundation to address risks in specific domains, such as health, climate change, technology, safety, security, and other areas.

The article argues that applied risk work is often multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary, because practical risk problems usually require knowledge from several fields. However, Aven stresses that this does not prevent risk science from being a distinct science. The article compares this situation to statistics: statistical applications may require expertise in medicine, economics, or engineering, but statistics remains a recognizable science with its own foundational knowledge.

The paper also reflects on the relationship between risk science and neighboring fields such as decision analysis, statistics, uncertainty analysis, safety, security, resilience, and reliability. It argues that these fields overlap with risk science, but risk science is distinguished by its comprehensive focus on risk understanding, assessment, communication, and handling.

The article concludes that diverse risk journals and perspectives are welcome, but new initiatives should build on the substantial foundational work already developed in risk analysis and risk science. According to the paper, recognizing a distinct risk science is important because practical risk challenges require a strong generic knowledge base to guide applications across domains.

###

Contact the author: Terje Aven, University of Stavanger, Norway. terje.aven@uis.no

The publisher KeAi was established by Elsevier and China Science Publishing & Media Ltd to unfold quality research globally. In 2013, our focus shifted to open access publishing. We now proudly publish more than 200 world-class, open access, English language journals, spanning all scientific disciplines. Many of these are titles we publish in partnership with prestigious societies and academic institutions, such as the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC).