ABSTRACT
A third major issue in contemporary debates over risk management turns on the extent to which management regimes should rest on quantified evaluations of risk (QRA) as opposed to more qualitative assessments. The majority of writers and practitioners continue to defend the role of QRA and thereby uphold the spirit (in more subdued form) of Prior Roger Schulz of Taize, who claimed that “statistics are signs from God”. Their challengers, on the other hand, are likely to be of a more cynical persuasion and to argue that there are “lies, damned lies, and statistics”.
