# Risk Mapping

Participants place color-coded sticky notes on a shared base map to identify local threats, assess vulnerabilities, and draft targeted mitigation actions.

**Time:** 90 minutes. Source specifies 90 to 180 minutes; this run sheet sets a baseline 90-minute agenda.
**People:** 8 to 25. Small working groups of 4 to 6 people around separate base maps, followed by full-group consolidation.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Locate context-specific risks on a visual map and agree on immediate mitigation steps.
**Use it when:** Use during project planning, site assessment, or community safety reviews when people need to pinpoint where physical, operational, or social hazards occur.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the focus is an abstract policy discussion without a clear physical territory, project boundary, or site workflow.

## Materials and tools

- 1 printed base map or sheet of butcher paper (roughly 3x4 feet) per subgroup of 4 to 6
- 3 pads of sticky notes in distinct colors (for example, pink for physical hazards, yellow for environmental, green for social/operational) per subgroup
- 1 fine-tip marker per participant
- 1 roll of low-tack painter tape
- 1 camera or smartphone for facilitator documentation

## Before participants arrive

1. Print or sketch the target geographic area, facility floor plan, or project boundary onto butcher paper.
2. Tape one base map to a table or flat wall for each table group.
3. Define a clear color legend on a visible wall: Pink = Physical/Infrastructure, Yellow = Environmental/Safety, Green = Social/Operational.
4. Set out markers and sticky notes at each table.

## Say this to open

Today we are mapping the risks that affect this shared space. A threat is an external danger, like a blind intersection or broken equipment. A vulnerability is a condition that makes people or assets prone to harm, like poor lighting or missing procedures. A risk is what happens when that threat meets a vulnerability. Our goal today is to place these issues on our map and plan concrete actions to prevent or mitigate them.

## How to run it

### 1. Introduce concepts and orient to map (10 minutes)

Facilitator delivers the opening script and reviews the boundaries of the base map. Verify that everyone recognizes key landmarks. Point out the color key on the wall.

### 2. Brainstorm and write risks (15 minutes)

Working in subgroups of 4 to 6, participants independently write specific hazards on sticky notes using the color key. Neutral example: write 'Unlit rear stairway door' on a pink note rather than a broad label like 'danger'. One hazard per note. People may write quietly or talk softly in their subgroup.

### 3. Locate risks on the map (20 minutes)

Each subgroup attaches their notes directly onto their base map at the exact spots where the risks occur. Group members cluster duplicates and clarify exact locations. Anyone who prefers not to place notes may hand them to a partner or point out the area.

### 4. Analyze patterns and priorities (20 minutes)

Subgroups review their clusters. Prompt them with two questions: 'Which areas have the heaviest concentration of notes?' and 'Which two risks are most urgent?' Each subgroup selects their top two urgent risks to present.

### 5. Propose action steps (15 minutes)

For each of the two selected risks, subgroups write concrete mitigations on a fresh sheet next to the map. Example actions include installing signage, updating maintenance schedules, or creating an emergency contact list. Each action must name an immediate next step.

### 6. Consolidate and debrief (10 minutes)

Each subgroup shares their two priority risks and proposed actions in 60 seconds. The facilitator photographs all completed maps for documentation and records the agreed actions.


## Debrief questions

- Which high-risk areas appeared across multiple tables?
- What simple mitigation could start within the next seven days?
- Where did people disagree on the severity of a risk, and why?

**Finished output:** A documented risk map with placed hazard notes and a written list of prioritized mitigation actions.

## Remote

Use a shared digital whiteboard tool (such as Miro or Google Maps) with the floor plan or map loaded as a locked background. Create color-coded sticky note banks. Run breakout rooms of 4 to 6 participants for steps 2 through 5, then call everyone back to the main room for step 6.

## Hybrid

Pair an in-person room with remote participants by appointing a designated in-person proxy at each physical table. Remote participants post their hazard notes into a shared digital canvas or read them aloud to their proxy, who transcribes them onto physical sticky notes and places them on the table map.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants can contribute verbally, write notes, sketch directly on paper, or serve as the table note-placer.
- Any participant may pass on speaking during the reporting step or choose not to mark sensitive locations.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants write broad systemic issues that cannot be placed on a specific spot on the map.**

Ask them what specific spot feels that effect most directly, or create a 'Site-Wide Risks' margin along the edge of the map sheet.

**One dominant participant places all the notes and talks over others.**

Set a round-robin placement rule where each person places one note at a time and explains it in one sentence.


## Terms used here

- Threat: An external factor or event capable of causing harm or disruption.
- Vulnerability: The internal conditions or weaknesses that make a site or group susceptible to damage.
- Mitigation: A concrete step taken to reduce the severity or likelihood of a hazard.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Participatory Methods (participatorymethods.com). The public source records this as a standard participatory rural appraisal and community planning methodology without naming an individual author.

Retained core participatory mapping flow from Participatory Methods source: introduce terms, prepare base map, brainstorm risks, place on map, analyze, propose actions, and document. UWT adapted the wide 90-180 minute window into a standardized 90-minute structure, added group sizing per table, concrete step timers, color coding, and explicit hybrid proxy instructions.

[Participatory Methods](https://participatorymethods.com/activities/risk-mapping/)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/risk-mapping/