Risk Analysis, Vol. 38, No. 9, 2018 DOI: 10.1111/risa.12978 How to Perform an Ethical Risk Analysis (eRA) Sven Ove Hansson * Ethical analysis is often needed in the preparation of policy decisions on risk. A three-step method is proposed for performing an ethical risk analysis (eRA). In the first step, the people concerned are identified and categorized in terms of the distinct but compatible roles of being risk-exposed, a beneficiary, or a decisionmaker. In the second step, a more detailed classifica- tion of roles and role combinations is performed, and ethically problematic role combinations are identified. In the third step, further ethical deliberation takes place, with an emphasis on individual risk-benefit weighing, distributional analysis, rights analysis, and power analysis. Ethical issues pertaining to subsidiary risk roles, such as those of experts and journalists, are also treated in this phase. An eRA should supplement, not replace, a traditional risk analy- sis that puts emphasis on the probabilities and severities of undesirable events but does not cover ethical issues such as agency, interpersonal relationships, and justice. KEY WORDS: Distribution of risks and benefits; ethical risk analysis; justice; risk roles; stakeholders 1. INTRODUCTION Ethical issues have a central role in many risk problems, not least in contentious policy decisions. There can be no doubt that our appraisals of risks are much influenced by our moral views. For instance, it makes a difference if someone risks her own life in order to earn a fortune for herself, or if she risks someone else’s life for the same purpose. We usu- ally assess a risk that was chosen freely quite dif- ferently from an otherwise similar risk that was im- posed upon a person against her will. Indeed, many if not most risk management problems—including some that have been described as conflicts between rational experts and an irrational public—have a sub- stantial ethical component. However, modern risk analysis is dominated by risk assessment methods that have an almost exclusive focus on the proba- bilities and severities of undesired events and con- sequences. Such analyses are indispensable, but they do not provide all the information that decisionmak- ers need. In particular, they do not cover the issues of agency and interpersonal relationships that form ∗ Division of Philosophy, Royal Institute of Technology, Stock- holm; soh@kth.se. the core of most ethical discussions of risk. There- fore, traditional risk analysis should be supplemented with an ethical risk analysis (eRA) that identifies and appraises the ethical issues involved. A party involved in a risk management issue can perform an eRA from its own point of view. For instance, a business company can conduct an ethical enquiry into its risk management issues in order to determine which decision options are compatible with its value commitments. Such enquiries are much to be commended, but it would be unrealistic to assume that they will be trusted outside of the or- ganization for which they were performed. Issues of bias and professional or scientific integrity tend to be particularly precarious in ethics. (1) The public may (at least in some cases) rely on assessments made or commissioned by a private company, but this should not be expected for assessments whose subject mat- ter is ethical. Therefore, nonpartisan ethical analysis is needed in contentious risk management issues. Although the methodology to be described here can be used by analysts with different affiliations, it is proposed that ethical analysis should—if at all possible—be performed by bodies with a reasonable chance of being perceived as impartial. These would 1820 0272-4332/18/0100-1820$22.00/1 C  2018 Society for Risk Analysis