Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty
Abstract
The article will conceptualize procedural mechanisms and structural configurations of risk governance with adaptive and integrative capacity in a general and comprehensive manner in order to better grasp the dynamics, structures, and functionality of risk-handling processes. Adaptive and integrative risk governance is supposed to address challenges raised by three characteristics that result from a lack of knowledge and/or competing knowledge claims about the risk problem: complexity, scientific uncertainty, and socio-political ambiguity. Adaptive and integrative capacity are broadly seen as the ability of politics and society to collectively design and implement a systematic approach to organizational and policy learning in institutional settings that are conducive to resolve cognitive, evaluative and normative problems, and conflicts of risks. For this purpose, we propose a risk governance model that augments the classical model of risk analysis (risk assessment, management, communication) by including steps of pre-estimation, interdisciplinary risk estimation, risk characterization and evaluation, risk management as well as monitoring and control. This new risk governance model also incorporates expert, stakeholder and public involvement as a core feature in the stage of communication and deliberation. A governance decision tree finally allows a systematic step-by-step procedure for the more inclusive risk-handling process.
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?
Stakeholders hold different degrees of risk knowledge, perception, and tolerance to risk.
“Stakeholders hold different degrees of risk knowledge, perception, and tolerance to risk (Klinke & Renn, 2012); WWR governance can account for these varying risk cultures.”
From Scientists' warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply (2021) · cites this paper as Klinke & Renn, 2012
Cites
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544 · see citing works
(2000) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803475 · Cited by 2,987 · see citing works
Living on the border: knowledge, risk and transdisciplinarity
Horlick-Jones, T., & Sime, J. (2004) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.006 · Cited by 248 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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-citationScientists' warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply
Robinne, F., Hallema, D. W., Bladon, K. D., Flannigan, M. D., Boisramé, G., Bréthaut, C. M., Doerr, S. H., Di Baldassarre, G., Gallagher, L. A., Hohner, A. K., et al. (2021) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.14086 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Social perception of systemic risks
Schweizer, P., Goble, R., & Renn, O. (2022) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13831 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Haitsma, L. M. (2025) · European Journal of Social Security · doi:10.1177/13882627251351093 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Uncertainty refers to when there is limited scienti fi c knowledge on how to assess and manage risks and potential negative outcomes (Klinke and Renn, 2012: 276).”
- Authors
- Klinke, A., & Renn, O.
- Affiliations
- Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
- University of Stuttgart (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Klinke, Andreas
- Venue
- Journal of Risk Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 273-292
- ISSN
- 1366-9877 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4461
- OpenAlex
- W1989993615
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 34.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Risk Research (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Political Analysis
- Keywords
- risk governance, adaptive governance, integrative governance, scientific uncertainty, risk communication, stakeholder engagement, citizen participation, risk characterization, risk management, risk monitoring and control, policy learning
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