The concept of acceptable risk is not particularly easy to define. It is essentially a measure of the risk of harm, injury or disease arising from a chemical or process that will be tolerated by a person or group. Think China’s insistence to continue using coal-fired plants because the economy is said to be unable to afford non-coal power generation.

Whether a risk is ‘acceptable’ will depend upon the advantages that the person or group perceives to be obtainable in return for taking the risk. The ‘risk-taker’ may be oblivious to whatever scientific and other advice that is offered about the magnitude of the risk. Think Japan’s insistence to continue whaling for purposes of research.

There is a symbiotic relationship between business drivers and the security issues that can affect them. After all, a company is not in business to be secure. It is in business to be profitable.

Risk always presents a certain level of threat. It takes a smarter business organization to analyze the risk over the long haul and not for expediency purposes only.

Countries are essentially run like business organizations – for profit. Going back to China’s insistence to use coal, it is apparent that the country considers financial viability only in the immediate term. Perhaps the difference between China and a country that chooses to explore renewable energies (even if this means heaps of additional funds) such as the US is that the latter considers having a good business sense over the long haul.

Image

Via Global Coal