Multi-agency risk information sharing and risk assessment in the United Kingdom: a preliminary empirical investigation of practitioner perspectives

Purpose This exploratory paper aims to examine how emergency agency practitioners in the UK understand, conduct and share risk assessments, with the aim of identifying gaps and areas for systemic improvement. The study is positioned as an exploratory, preliminary empirical investigation: many of the gaps identified are already recognised within practice, and the paper’s principal contribution is to provide empirical, practitioner-grounded evidence confirming and elaborating these long-standing challenges. Design/methodology/approach A preliminary, qualitative, interpretivist study drawing on semi-structured interviews with eight senior professionals from five statutory emergency agencies (environment agency, fire and rescue, police, local government and ambulance service). Data were analysed using a framework analysis approach structured around the UK National Risk Assessment (NRA) six-step process. Findings The study identifies pervasive fragmentation across all stages of the risk assessment cycle, including the absence of shared geospatial risk and vulnerability data; divergent epistemological frameworks impeding joint assessment; local resilience forums functioning primarily as compliance mechanisms; historical bias in hazard review with limited horizon scanning; siloed risk treatment planning; and inconsistent, agency-bounded monitoring and review processes. Because agencies assess risks independently using different methods and criteria, cross-sector cascading risks are not modelled jointly; this is highlighted as a key practical implication. Many of the gaps will be familiar to practitioners; the study contributes preliminary empirical evidence that confirms and locates them across the NRA cycle. Originality/value The paper contributes exploratory, practitioner-grounded evidence to scholarship on interoperability, cross-agency vulnerability assessment and the governance of risk information in complex multi-hazard environments. It extends existing interoperability frameworks by adding an epistemological dimension, relates this dimension to risk governance and knowledge-boundary literature and provides an initial multi-agency mapping of gaps across all six stages of the UK NRA process.