by Fabio Accardi
In the first part of the book “Risk and Control Governance” [*1] I have highlighted, also with simple examples, how the theme of risk management pertains, in the first place, to our personal dimension. Indeed, in daily choices, if we want to face a decision that concerns us, we always need to make assessments that relate to the probability of running into some events or not. Of course, this relates to decisions that have an impact on the environment and the social context in which we live. The principles and values that guide our conduct constitute the foundations of our “culture of risk”. This can eventually condition the creation of value for the areas that interest us most directly. In terms of environment, the terms “nimby” (not in my backyard) and “pimby” (please in my backyard) are now widely applied. We cannot assess in advance whether a certain type of behavior attributable to these two patterns leads or not to value creation for us and for others. In any case, our choices are not always guided (only) by rationality and compensated by adequate returns or personal advantages. It is known, for example, that the phenomenon of illegal landfills of materials harmful to health, as well as a serious violation of the rules with the subsequent risks of sanctions also constitutes a serious damage to people and the environment. Yet, willing people have allowed them to be built not far from their homes, demonstrating a poor perception of the risks to which they are exposed. In order to obtain easy immediate profits, in fact, the consequences that these landfills have on them and their families are not evaluated. Similarly, if we have a large garden, we can agree on the benefits that can derive to us and our neighbors from the installation of solar panels, but we oppose because we do not renounce to sacrifice a portion of space to devote to these installations.
Continue reading…
