Striking a Balance: Stakeholder Perceptions of Risk in Horse Racing.
Authors: McCarthy Jessie, Cameron-Whytock Heather A, Bennet Euan D
Journal: Equine veterinary journal
Summary
# Editorial Summary: Striking a Balance: Stakeholder Perceptions of Risk in Horse Racing Public scrutiny of racehorse welfare has intensified in recent years, challenging the UK and Irish racing industry's social licence to operate. McCarthy and colleagues conducted qualitative interviews with 12 key stakeholders from veterinary, regulatory and communications sectors to understand how risk on race day is perceived and should be managed within this complex industry environment. The research identified three distinct framings of risk amongst participants. Some stakeholders emphasised public misunderstanding and communication strategy as primary concerns; others prioritised genuine welfare risks and proactive mitigation; whilst a third group viewed race-day incidents as largely inevitable. Responsibility for risk management was variously attributed to trainers, jockeys, regulators and the public themselves, reflecting the fragmented nature of accountability within racing. A consistent theme emerged: the industry's entrenchment in tradition has slowed its adaptation to evolving societal expectations. Despite these divisions, shared concern for equine welfare was evident across all participants, alongside genuine desire for improved safety measures. The study highlights a critical tension between managing actual welfare risks and managing public perception, and demonstrates that resolving internal disagreements about risk attribution and establishing unified goals will be essential for racing's future sustainability. Without deliberate scientific engagement and proactive collaboration amongst stakeholders, the industry risks further erosion of public confidence.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Racing professionals should recognize that stakeholder divisions over risk management and responsibility attribution are undermining industry credibility; resolving these internal conflicts is essential for maintaining public support.
- •Evidence-based, proactive safety improvements should be prioritized over messaging strategies alone; the public increasingly expects tangible welfare measures rather than communication management.
- •Industry bodies must establish shared goals around equine welfare and actively engage with scientific evidence to rebuild trust with regulators and the public.
Key Findings
- •Stakeholders framed risk management either through communication/public perception or through welfare-focused proactive mitigation, reflecting internal divisions within the industry.
- •Three key themes emerged: managing risk versus managing the message, balancing tradition with progress on risk reduction, and attribution of responsibility across trainers, jockeys, regulators and the public.
- •Industry stakeholders expressed shared concern for equine welfare but disagreed on whether accidents are unavoidable or whether more could be done to minimize avoidable risks.
- •The racing industry's slow adaptation to changing public expectations and internal divisions threaten its social licence to operate despite recognition of the need for improved safety measures.