# Striking a balance: Stakeholder perceptions of risk in horse racing

## TL;DR

This paper explores how UK and Irish horse racing stakeholders perceive and manage risks to racehorse safety, highlighting tensions between tradition, public expectations, and welfare concerns.

## Contribution

The study provides novel insights into stakeholder perspectives on risk management in horse racing, emphasizing the role of communication and cultural factors.

## Key findings

- Stakeholders view risk through the lens of public misunderstanding and cultural tradition.
- There is a divide between those who see accidents as unavoidable and those who advocate for proactive risk mitigation.
- Participants emphasized the need for shared goals and improved communication to sustain public support.

## Abstract

Thoroughbred racing is a major industry, and in recent years public concerns about equine safety have become more prominent, particularly in relation to on‐track injuries and fatalities. This has challenged the industry's social licence to operate (SLO).

To investigate and elucidate how United Kingdom and Irish racing stakeholders perceive risks to racehorses on race day and how those risks should be managed.

Qualitative analysis of stakeholder perspectives using a constructionist approach.

Twelve stakeholders from veterinary, communication, and regulatory sectors within racing in the United Kingdom and Ireland were interviewed. Semi‐structured interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Three key themes were developed ‘Managing Risk, or Managing the Message?’, ‘The Balance between Tradition and Progress on Reducing Risks’, and ‘Attributing Responsibility and the Public Disconnect’. Participants framed risk according to public misunderstanding and effective communication, while others placed increased emphasis on welfare risks and proactive mitigation measures. Some participants viewed ‘accidents’ as unavoidable, others believed that more could be done to minimise avoidable risk. Attribution of responsibility was directed towards various industry stakeholders including trainers, jockeys, regulators and the public. Interviewees noted the industry to be rooted in tradition and slow to adapt to changing expectations.

Familiarity between the interviewing researcher and some participants may have encouraged open discussion but could have influenced how responses were framed.

Stakeholders framed risk in ways shaped by public expectations, culture, tradition, and lived experience. There is shared concern for equine welfare and a desire for improved safety measures in conjunction with the management of public perceptions. For a sustainable future, internal divisions must be resolved, shared goals established, and proactive engagement with science pursued to safeguard equine welfare and sustain public support.