Inclusive risk governance: concepts and application to environmental policy making
Abstract
The concept of inclusive risk governance is based on a normative belief that the integration of knowledge and values can best be accomplished by involving those actors in the decision‐making process that are able to contribute all the respective knowledge as well as the variability of values necessary to make effective, efficient, fair and morally acceptable decisions about risk. In the risk arena the major actors are governments, the economic sector, scientific communities and representatives of civil society. The paper addresses the conceptual issues of how to integrate the contributions of the different actor groups in risk governance. Who and what is or should be included in the deliberations, and how is closure accomplished or reached in such settings? The main thesis in the paper is that these two questions can only be answered in the context of six underlying concepts of deliberation in democratic societies. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Inclusive risk governance prioritises equity, transparency, and moral acceptability, aiming to ensure governance processes are effective, inclusive, and adaptive.
“This approach prioritises equity, transparency, and moral acceptability, aiming to ensure that governance processes are not only effective but also inclusive and adaptive (Renn and Schweizer, 2009).”
From Risk Governance, State Capacity, and Critical Human Security: Evolution of Risk Governance in Response to Systemic Risk in the UK and South Korea (2025) · cites this paper as Renn and Schweizer, 2009
Inclusive risk governance builds upon principles of collaboration, transparency, inclusivity, and adaptability by integrating diverse perspectives and actively involving multiple stakeholders throughout all phases of risk management.
“Inclusive risk governance builds upon these principles by integrating diverse perspectives and actively involving multiple stakeholders -governments, private sectors, scientific communities, and civil society -throughout all phases of risk management.”
From Risk Governance, State Capacity, and Critical Human Security: Evolution of Risk Governance in Response to Systemic Risk in the UK and South Korea (2025) · cites this paper as Renn and Schweizer, 2009
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cascades of green: A review of ecosystem-based adaptation in urban areas
Brink, E., Aalders, T., Ádám, D., Feller, R., Henselek, Y., Hoffmann, A., Ibe, K., Matthey-Doret, A., Meyer, M., Negrut, N. L., et al. (2016) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.003 · Cited by 398 · see citing works
Stakeholder and public involvement in risk governance
Renn, O. (2015) · International Journal of Disaster Risk Science · doi:10.1007/s13753-015-0037-6 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Self-citationSystemic risks – concepts and challenges for risk governance
Schweizer, P.-J. (2021) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2019.1687574 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Self-citationSocial perception of systemic risks
Schweizer, P., Goble, R., & Renn, O. (2022) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13831 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Ideals, practices, and future prospects of stakeholder involvement in sustainability science
Mielke, J., Vermaßen, H., & Ellenbeck, S. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1706085114 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Kim, E., Oh, Y., & Kennett, P. (2025) · Social Policy and Society · doi:10.1017/s1474746425000144 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“This approach prioritises equity, transparency, and moral acceptability, aiming to ensure that governance processes are not only effective but also inclusive and adaptive (Renn and Schweizer, 2009).”
- Authors
- Renn, O., & Schweizer, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Stuttgart (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Renn, Ortwin
- Venue
- Environmental Policy and Governance
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 174-185
- ISSN
- 1756-932X (ISSN-L)
- 1756-9338
- OpenAlex
- W2080242819
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 44.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Environmental Policy and Governance (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Keywords
- deliberative democracy, environmental policy-making, knowledge integration, value integration, stakeholder engagement, civil society, scientific communities, decision-making
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
