Society’s response to risk taking
For some people in society adventure and risk-taking is important, for others these activities are
perceived to be senseless and dangerous. The ways in which people respond to risk-taking behaviour
vary and they are generally related to perceived risk rather than real risk. That is, what they think the
dangers associated with a particular pursuit may be versus the actual or real risk.
High Ropes activities are perceived by many to
be extremely high risk. In reality the use of
harnesses, belay ropes, helmets and spotters
make this activity quite low in real risk
Key Concepts:
-The ways in which people respond to risk taking behaviour vary, and they are generally related to
perceived risk rather than real risk
-Responses can be affected by the way high risk adventures are portrayed in the media.
Some of the criticisms of adventure activities relate to the way society defines roles for different
people. Other critics focus on the cost of possible rescues or question the need to participate in
seemingly dangerous activities in the first place.
Much of the response is shaped by the way a pursuit or endeavour, and any associated incidents, are
portrayed by the media. This can be seen in the 1997 case of a Melbourne school girl injured during
a school caving excursion. Melbourne newspapers, commercial tv stations, as well as radio and local
papers reported the incident. All media misreported what happened, and some were extremely
exaggerated.
Response to Tragedy by authorities such as local, state, or federal government and statutory bodies,
such as Parks Victoria, usually involves the imposition of regulations. Often such regulations take the
form of training (as has occurred in canoeing) and registration requirements. Another response is to
restrict access. For example at Hanging Rock, rock climbing is banned because rocks have been
dislodged causing a risk to other users. Sometimes sites are closed altogether.
One way of implementing these measures is to introduce or redefine zoning restrictions on public
land such as National Parks. A direct effect of such restrictions is to reduce the sense of freedom
experienced by users, and in some cases reduce the opportunity for friction to occur between
groups with different values (eg bushwalkers and trail(motor) bike riders. Such restrictions can also
increase the safety of both users of the natural environment and its inhabitants.
Introducing and enhancing safety regulations is also a response that can be initiated by other
participants in a particular pursuit following an incident. They may work together with authorities in
order to introduce a code of conduct . Another strategy is to encourage certification so participants
are knowledgeable about the skills and safety techniques required for particular activities. While
such measures certainly lead to safer activities, for some they reduce their sense of freedom. They
can also increase the cost of pursuits due to new equipment requirements and perhaps traning.
Shelter, huts, snow pole lines, signs , fences, barriers at lookouts are other tangible examples of the
way in which society can respond to risk taking activities. Such infrastructure improves safety,
sometimes even providing a false sense of security, but can also diminish one’s sense of wilderness
and adventure due to its visual impact.
Chain of events for An Incident involving Death or near Death
-Media coverage (often inaccurate)
-Public response(eg Letters to the editor, radio talkback, internet forums
-investigation
-Coronors inquest
-Media coverage
-public response
-Criminal or civil proceedings
-Industry self regulation
-New Government legislation