Systemic Risks from Different Perspectives

Risk Analysis, vol. 42, pp. 1902–1920

Abstract

Systemic risks are characterized by high complexity, multiple uncertainties, major ambiguities, and transgressive effects on other systems outside of the system of origin. Due to these characteristics, systemic risks are overextending established risk management and create new, unsolved challenges for policymaking in risk assessment and risk governance. Their negative effects are often pervasive, impacting fields beyond the obvious primary areas of harm. This article addresses these challenges of systemic risks from different disciplinary and sectorial perspectives. It highlights the special contributions of these perspectives and approaches and provides a synthesis for an interdisciplinary understanding of systemic risks and effective governance. The main argument is that understanding systemic risks and providing good governance advice relies on an approach that integrates novel modeling tools from complexity sciences with empirical data from observations, experiments, or simulations and evidence-based insights about social and cultural response patterns revealed by quantitative (e.g., surveys) or qualitative (e.g., participatory appraisals) investigations. Systemic risks cannot be easily characterized by single numerical estimations but can be assessed by using multiple indicators and including several dynamic gradients that can be aggregated into diverse but coherent scenarios. Lastly, governance of systemic risks requires interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral cooperation, a close monitoring system, and the engagement of scientists, regulators, and stakeholders to be effective as well as socially acceptable.

Authors 7

1. Ortwin Renn

   Research Institute for Sustainability at GFZ

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) Potsdam Germany

   Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS), Potsdam, Germany

2. Manfred D. Laubichler

   Arizona State University

   Affiliation as printed

   Arizona State University Phoenix AZ USA

   Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA

3. Klaus Lucas Aachen

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   Technical University Aachen Aachen Germany

   Technical University Aachen, Aachen, Germany

4. Wolfgang Kröger

   ETH Zurich

   Affiliation as printed

   Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich Switzerland

   Swiss Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland

5. Jochen Schanze

   Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development · Technische Universität Dresden

   Affiliation as printed

   Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development Dresden Germany

   Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany

   Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Dresden, Germany

6. Roland Werner Scholz

   ETH Zurich

   Affiliation as printed

   Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich Switzerland

   Swiss Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland

7. Pia‐Johanna Schweizer corresponding

   Research Institute for Sustainability at GFZ

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) Potsdam Germany

   Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS), Potsdam, Germany