Human Safety, Security & Risk Management Challenges: Unique, Dynamic and Dependent Variables Across Location, Cultures and Demographics

Provision and assurance of safety, security and risk management in any one geographical location is challenging enough, let alone across multiple geographic sites, across jurisdictions or across international borders.

Because humans remain highly variable and confound any one or simplified categorisation efforts.

Traits, states, behaviours, characteristics and environmental stimulus further confound universal measurement or classification.

Moreover, threats, danger, perils and hazards are perceived, impact and harm individuals and demographics differently. As a result, vulnerability (perceived and real) vary as dependent variables.

Culture, gender, ideology, education, age, status, wealth, etc further attenuate human variables, regardless of shared environment or universal exposure to risk(s).

"Increasingly, risks are “boundaryless” insofar as while a certain type of risk might be deemed to “inhabit” a particular location or environment, the complexity of contemporary systems inevitably means that organizations or domains cannot remain isolated, but are best represented as a series of overlapping subsystems"

(Glendon & Clarke, 2016)

Granularity, frameworks and specification is required for systems, processes or entities pursuing human safety, security, resilience and risk mitigation objectives.

It is therefore concerning and conspicuous where systems, ratings or 'risk' perspectives lack even rudimentary segmentation or distinctions across human variables.

As a result, a single 'risk' rating, categorisation or 'value' associated with human safety, security, resilience or risk is likely the product of power, preference, privilege, curation and over simplification of the real world or the people(s) represented.

In other words, try as we may, human safety, security, threats, risk and resilience don't fit into neat, simple or minimalistic categorisation such as low, medium or high.

Because people, context and threats change and act in variable ways at varying times. and variable scales of harm(s).

For example, nighttime economy issues influence and affect human demographics in differing ways at differing scales.

Violence, crime, exploitation, harm, etc are not universal across human groups.

Women, young males and ethnic groups or ideology may be higher or lower risk factors, environment dependent. A fixed risk rating for day and night, dearth of other human clustering, behaviour or traits, is insufficient.

The same applies for health and medical threats, such as illness, viruses, epidemics and pandemics. Vulnerability varies.

"Three current trends in risk research identified were

(1) increased adoption of multidisciplinary approaches;

(2) the problematic distinction between risk proximity and distance; and

(3) the socially constructed and multiscalar definitions of key terms (e.g., risk, danger, vulnerability) across various dimensions. The nature of risk is changing, for example, becoming more focused on risks associated with developing technologies and entangled with emotional responses to risk, such as worry and fear"

(Glendon & Clarke, 2016)

In sum, human safety, security, resilience and risk management typically seeks to cluster disparate variables and broad human traits, experiences and fear into a few convenient categories.

However, humans are complex, variable entities, as are the environments in which they inhabit and the activities they engage in.

Therefore, human safety, security, resilience and risk analysis requires detailed consideration for individual and collective variances. A lack of granularity indicates a lack of validity and reliability.

That is, some people may fall within the broad categorisation, at varying times, but a greater number are inadequately considered or accurately assessed within the context of 'risk'.

In short, human safety, security, risk and resilience assessments and management strategies must contain detailed demographics, specific to threat(s), exposure, vulnerability, controls/mitigations and active measures of protection and management before 'risk' could be considered accurate or contextual enough to apply to any one person within a specific context or environment.

Ridley Tony

Risk, Security, Safety, Resilience & Management Sciences

Reference:

Glendon, I & Clarke, S. (2016) Human Safety and Risk Management: A Psychological Perspective, 3rd ed, CRC Press