An analysis of public-interest group positions on radiation protection

Health Physics

Volumn 91, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 508-513

  Florig, H Keith ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; Public information; Radiation risk; Waste, lowlevel

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION; RECYCLING; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

CONSUMER ADVOCACY; DECISION MAKING; PUBLIC OPINION; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; RISK FACTORS; RISK MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33749819580     PISSN: 00179078     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.HP.0000232650.11844.74     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Bauer HH. Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. Chicago: University of Illinois Press; 1994.
2. Bedsworth LL, Lowenthal M, Kastenberg WE. Uncertainty and regulation: the rhetoric of risk in the California low-level waste debate. Sci Technol Human Values 29:406-427; 2004.
3. Bess A. Nuclear waste recyclers target consumer products. Reuters News Service August 27; 2001.
4. Chess C, Purcell K. Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works? Environ Sci Technol 33:2685-2692; 1999.
5. Chiles JR. Inviting disaster: lessons from the edge of technology. New York: Harper-Collins; 2001.
6. Chugh D, Bazerman MH, Banaji MR. Bounded ethicality as a psychological barrier to recognizing conflicts of interest. In: Conflicts of interest: challenges and solutions in business, law, medicine, and public policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005: 74-95.
7. D'Arrigo D, Foushee L, Kraft DA. NRC wants to allow radioactive consumer products [online]. 1999. Available at: www.neis.org/press/radscrapPR99D.htm. Accessed 17 August 2006.
8. D'Arrigo D, Gould R, Kraft D, Riccio J, Hirt A, Gunter K, Carroll G. Comments to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on "Rulemaking on controlling the disposition of solid materials" [online]. 2003. Available at: www.nirs.org/radwaste/recycling/radrecyclecomments63003.htm. Accessed 17 August 2006.
9. Davy B. Fairness as compassion: towards a less unfair siting policy. Risk Health Safety Environ 7:99-108; 1996.
10. Douglas M. Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. New York: Russel Sage; 1985.
11. Ewall M. Low-level loopholes, low-level lies [online]. 1995. Available at: www.downwinders.org/loophole.html. Accessed 17 August 2006.
12. Fiorino DJ. Technical and democratic values in risk analysis. Risk Anal 9:293-299; 1989.
13. Freudenburg WR. Can we learn from failure? Examining US experiences with nuclear repository siting. J Risk Res 7:153-169; 2004.
14. Hauter W. Energy Department drops contract to perform environmental impact statement for radioactive materials recycling [online]. 2001. Available at: www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=673. Accessed 17 August 2006.
15. Hirsch D, D'Arrigo D. Groups criticize homeland security plans to relax radiation cleanup standards for a "dirty bomb" or terrorist nuclear explosive [online]. 2004. Available at: www.nirs.org/press/12-02-2004/1. Accessed 17 August 2006.
16. International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Oxford: Pergamon Press; ICRP Publication 60; Ann ICRP 21; 1991.
17. Janis IL. Groupthink: psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company; 1982.
18. Johnsrud JH. A massive U.S. government and international effort is underway to declare that "low-level" ionizing radiation is harmless? [online]. 1999. Available at: www.necnp.org/files/newsletters/otw1299.html. Accessed 17 August 2006.
19. Keeney RL. Value-focused thinking: a path to creative decision making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1992.
20. Klasky PM. Re: Recommendations and policy criteria on low level radioactive waste containment in California, December 20, 1999 [online]. 1999. Available at: http://banwaste.enviroweb.org/html/LLRWreport.html. Accessed 17 August 2006.
21. Ledwidge L, Moore L, Crawford L. Stakeholder perspectives on radiation protection. Health Phys 87:293-299; 2004.
22. Magee RS, Adelman DE, Beyea J, Brenizer Jr. JS, Brothers LL, Budnitz RJ, Choppin GR, Corradini M, Dally JW, Epp ER, Mushkatel A, Rubin RR, Ryan MT, Smith RI, Stein D, von Winterfeldt D. Stakeholder reactions to the USNRC issues paper. In: The disposition dilemma: controlling the release of solid materials from Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed facilities. Washington, DC: Committee on Alternatives for Controlling the Release of Solid Materials from Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Licensed Facilities, National Research Council; Appendix F; 2002: 218-229.
23. Maloney M. Ending the nuclear renaissance. NEIS News, Winter 2004 [online]. 2004. Available at: www.neis.org/newsletters/NEIS_News_Winter_04.pdf. Accessed 17 August 2006.
24. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Limitation of exposure to ionizing radiation. Bethesda, MD: NCRP; Report No. 116; 1993.
25. Petts J. Barriers to participation and deliberation in risk decisions: evidence from waste management. J Risk Res 7:115-133; 2004.
26. Pillutla MM, Murnighan JK. Unfairness, anger and spite: emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 63:208-224; 1996.
27. Plough A, Krimsky S. The emergence of risk communication studies: social and political context. Sci Technol Human Values 12:4-10; 1987.
28. Rawls J. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press; 1999.
29. Shrader-Frechette K, Persson L. Ethical, logical and scientific problems with the new ICRP proposals. J Radiol Prot 22:149-161; 2002.
30. Stern PC, Fineberg HV. Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Research Council, Committee on Risk Characterization; 1996.
31. Wynne B. Creating public alienation: expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Sci Culture 10:445-482; 2001.