The political science of risk perception

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 91-99

  Jasanoff, Sheila ^a  

^a Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; PUBLIC POLICY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

DICHOTOMY; POLITICAL SCIENCE;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 0031599231     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00129-4     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. Why study risk perception?. Risk Analysis, 1982, 2, 83-93.
2. Slovic, P., Beyond numbers: a broader perspective on risk perception and risk communication. In Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Risk Management, ed. R. Hollander and D. Mayo. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, pp. 48-65.
3. Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S. & Fischhoff, B., Characterizing perceived risk. In Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology, ed. R. W. Kates, C. Hohenemser and J. X. Kasperson. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1985, pp. 91-125.
4. Jasanoff, S., Markle, G., Petersen, J. & Pinch, T. (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995.
5. Johnson, B. B. & Covello, V. (eds.), The Social and Cultural Construction of Risk. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1987.
6. Wynne, B., Public understanding of science. In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen and T. Pinch (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995, pp. 361-388.
7. Irwin, A. & Wynne, B. (eds.), Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1996.
8. Bloor, D., Knowledge and Social Imagery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1976.
9. Foucault, M., The Archaeology of Knowledge. Tavistock, London, 1972.
10. Foucault, M., The Order of Things. Vintage, New York, 1994.
11. Federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations and low-income populations. Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994. Federal Register, 1994, 59, 7629-7633.
12. Douglas, M., Risk Acceptability According to the Social Sciences. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1985.
13. Wynne, B., Sheepfarming after Chernobyl. Environment, 1989, 31, 11-15, 33-39.
14. Krimsky, S. & Plough, A., Environmental Hazards: Communicating Risks as a Social Process. Auburn House, Dover, MA, 1988.
15. National Research Council, Science and Judgment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1994.
16. Landy, M., Roberts, M. & Thomas, S. The Environmental Protection Agency: Asking the Wrong Questions. Oxford University Press, New York, 1990.
17. Rosen, J. D., Much ado about Alar. Issues in Science and Technology, 1990 (Fall), 85-90.
18. Breyer, S., Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993.
19. National Research Council, Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1983.
20. Jasanoff, S., The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990.
21. Jasanoff, S. Science, politics, and the renegotiation of expertise at EPA. Osiris, 1991, 7, 195-217.
22. Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A., Risk and Culture. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1982.
23. Jasanoff, S. Bridging the two cultures of risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 1993, 13, 123-129.
24. Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management, Framework for Environmental Health Risk Management. Final Report, Vol. 1. Washington, DC, 1997.
25. Finkel, A. M., Confronting Uncertainty in Risk Management. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 1990.
26. Bullard, R. D., Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and Environmental Quality. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1990.
27. Institute of Medicine, Women and Health Research: Ethical and Legal Issues of Including Women in Clinical Studies. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1994.
28. Marshall, E. New law brings affirmative action to clinical research. Science, 1994, 263, 602.
29. Schoen, D. A. & Rein, M., Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversy. New York, Basic Books, 1994.
30. Moolgavkar, S. H. (ed.), Scientific Issues in Quantitative Cancer Risk Assessment. Birkhauser, Boston, MA, 1990.
31. Ames, B. N., Magaw, R. & Gold, L. S. Ranking possible carcinogenic hazards. Science, 1987, 236, 271-280.
32. Perrow, C., Normal Accidents. Basic Books, New York, 1984.
33. Clarke, L., Acceptable Risk? Making Decisions in Toxic Environment. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1989.
34. Bijker, W., Hughes, T. & Pinch, T. (eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987.
35. Wynne, B. Unruly technology. Social Studies of Science, 1988, 18, 147-167.
36. Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident. US GPO, Washington, DC, 1986.
37. Jasanoff, S., Risk Management and Political Culture. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1986.
38. Jasanoff, S., Acceptable evidence in a pluralistic society. In Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Risk Management, ed. R. Hollander and D. Mayo. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991, pp. 29-47.
39. Porter, T. M., Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1995.
40. Beck, U., The Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Sage Publications, London, 1992.
41. Beck, U., Giddens, A. & Lash, S., Reflexive Modernity. Polity, London, 1994.
42. Trilling, L., The Liberal Imagination: Essays on Literature and Society. Penguin, Harmondsworth, UK, 1970.