Risk management implies that one has identified and analysed the root cause of the risk. In blood transfusion public and political opinion on the perceived risks are mainly related to product stigmatisation, to cognitive aspects of risk. Therefore this perception is affective, and has a negative connotation. In order to manage risk in an optimal manner, we need to understand how people think about it, and recognise that thoughts, feelings and behaviour are determined not only by psychological factors, but also by social, cultural and political influences. Perception of risk is always situated within a context, which may differ. Therefore people (i.e., public and political opinion) seem to act inconsistently from one risk context to another. Crucial for understanding the logic behind different risk perceptions is how people think about a hazard and organise information about it. The blood supply system has aspects that make it very vulnerable to crises of confidence, as the subject of blood can easily become stigmatised. The impact of the latter on the perception of blood transfusions and their recipients as well as the willingness of the public to accept transfusions can be dramatic. Risk perception needs to be monitored in order to anticipate and adequately deal with public and political acceptance. We know that risk and stigmatisation are closely interconnected, and that the costs are likely to be high both for human health and for the maintenance of the healthcare system. Thus there is a global need to carefully monitor the safety of the blood supply systems and communicate risk information in a way that both informs people and builds up public and political confidence. It is therefore not sufficient to simply state that the blood supply is safe; it must also be made safe. So risk management becomes an integral part of quality management, as it deals with the public perception of the blood supply system and its respective elements: procurement and use.