Risk perception by politicians and the public

Energy and Environment

Volumn 19, Issue 3-4, 2008, Pages 455-483

  Sjöberg, Lennart ^a,b   Drottz Sjöberg, Britt Marie ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b STOCKHOLM SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORIES; HEALTH RISKS; IONIZING RADIATION; PUBLIC POLICY; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EXPERT OPINIONS; MODEL FACTORS; NUCLEAR POLICIES; NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENTS; NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORIES; NUCLEAR WASTES; PERCEIVED RISKS; PERCEPTION MODELS; REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES; RISK MITIGATIONS;

RISK PERCEPTION;

PUBLIC ATTITUDE; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; RISK PERCEPTION; SPATIAL COGNITION; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 55149120707     PISSN: 0958305X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1260/095830508784641408     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Beck, U., Risk-Society. Towards a New Modernity, Sage, London, 1992.
2. Giddens, A., Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in Late Modern Age, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1991.
3. Sjöberg, L., af Wåhlberg, A., and Kvist, P., The Rise of Risk: Risk Related Bills Submitted to the Swedish Parliament in 1964-65 and 1993-95, Journal of Risk Research, 1998, 1(3), 191-195.
4. Ball, D.J., Deliberating over Britain's Nuclear Waste, Journal of Risk Research, 2006, 9(1), 1-11.
5. Ball, D.J. and Boehmer-Christiansen, S., Societal Concerns and Risk Decisions, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2007, 144(1-2), 556-563.
6. Morrall, J.E, III, A Review of the Record, Regulation, 1986(Nov/ Dec), 25-34.
7. Tengs, O.T., et al., Five-Hundred Life Saving Interventions and Their Cost Effectiveness, Risk Analysis, 1995, 15, 369-390.
8. Ramsberg, J. and Sjöberg, L., The Cost-Effectiveness of Life Saving Interventions in Sweden, Risk Analysis, 1997, 17, 467-478.
9. Hood, C., Rothstein, H., and Baldwin, R., The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001.
10. Breyer, S., Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993.
11. Sunstein, C.R., Risk and Reason. Safety, Law, and the Environment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002.
12. Furedi, F., Culture of Fear: Risk-Taking and the Morality of Low Expectation, Continuum International Publishing Group London, 2002.
13. Jennings, M.K., Political Responses to Pain and Loss - Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1998, American Political Science Review, 1999, 93, 1-13.
14. Lianos, M., Dangerization and the End of Deviance - the Institutional Environment, British Journal of Criminology, 2000, 40, 261-278
15. Sjöberg, L., and Winroth, E., Risk, Moral Value of Actions, and Mood, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1986, 27, 191-208.
16. Sjöberg, L., ed. Risk and Society. Studies in Risk Taking and Risk Generation. 1987, George Allen and Unwin: Hemel Hempstead, England.
17. Javeline, D., The Role of Blame in Collective Action: Evidence from Russia, American Political Science Review, 2003, 97, 107-121.
18. Sjöberg, L., Whose Risk Perception Should Influence Decisions?, Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety, 2001, 72(2), 149-152
19. Hahn, R.W. and Dudley, P.M., The Disconnect between Law and Policy Analysis: A Case Study of Drivers and Cell Phones, Administrative Law Review, 2003, 55, 127-185.
20. Boholm, Å., Comparative Studies of Risk Perception: A Review of Twenty Years of Research, Journal of Risk Research, 1998, 1, 135-164.
21. Slovic, P., ed. The Perception of Risk. 2000, Earthscan: London.
22. Starr, C., Social Benefit Versus Technological Risk, Science, 1969, 165, 1232-1238.
23. Fischhoff, B., et al., How Safe Is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes Towards Technological Risks and Benefits, Policy Sciences, 1978, 9(2), 127-152.
24. Lyons, R.A., et al., The Influence of Local Politicians on Pedestrian Safety, Injury Prevention, 2006, 12(5), 312-315.
25. Wiseman, V., et al., Involving the General Public in Priority Setting: Experiences from Australia, Social Science & Medicine, 2003, 56(5), 1001-1012.
26. Carter, N., et al., Miljön Och Din Hälsa. Enkätundersökning Av Oro För Miljöbetingade Hälsorisker. 1993, Yrkesmedicinska kliniken: Uppsala.
27. Drottz-Sjöberg, B.-M. and Sjöberg, L., Risk Perception and Worries after the Chernobyl Accident, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1990, 10(2), 135-149.
28. Sjöberg, L., Worry and Risk Perception, Risk Analysis, 1998, 18(1), 85-93.
29. Barny, M.-H., et al., Perception Des Risques Majeurs Dans La Population Bordelaise Et Chez Les Experts. 1990, Centre d'etudes nucleaires de Fontenay-aux-roses.
30. Rothman, S. and Lichter, S.R., Elite Ideology and Risk Perception in Nuclear Energy Policy, American Political Science Review, 1987, 81, 383-404.
31. Otway, H.J. and Fishbein, M., The Determinants of Attitude Formation: An Application to Nuclear Power. 1976, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis: Laxenburg, Austria.
32. Otway, H.J. and Fishbein, M., Public Attitudes and Decision Making. 1977, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis: Laxenburg, Austria.
33. Otway, H.J. Review of Research on Identification of Factors Influencing Social Response to Technological Risk. in International Conference on Nuclear Power and Its Fuel Cycle. 1977. Salzburg, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency.
34. Hämäläinen, R.P., Facts or Values - How Do Parliamentarians and Experts See Nuclear Power?, Energy Policy, 1991, 19, 464-472.
35. Gowda, M.V.R., Heuristics, Biases, and the Regulation of Risk, Policy Sciences, 1999, 32, 59-78.
36. Rundmo, T. and Moen, B.E., Risk Perception and Demand for Risk Mitigation in Transport: A Comparison of Lay People, Politicians and Experts, Journal of Risk Research, 2006, 9(6), 623-640.
37. Sjöberg, L., Attitudes and Risk Perceptions of Stakeholders in a Nuclear Waste Siting Issue, Risk Analysis, 2003, 23(4), 739-749
38. Barke, R.P. and Jenkins-Smith, H.C., Politics and Scientific Expertise: Scientists, Risk Perception, and Nuclear Waste Policy, Risk Analysis, 1993, 13, 425-439.
39. Sjöberg, L., The Allegedly Simple Structure of Experts' Risk Perception: An Urban Legend in Risk Research, Science Technology & Human Values, 2002, 27(4), 443-459.
40. Rowe, G. and Wright, G., Differences in Expert and Lay Judgments of Risk: Myth or Reality?, Risk Analysis, 2001, 21, 341-356.
41. Sjöberg, L. and Drottz-Sjöberg, B.-M., Attitudes Towards Nuclear Waste and Siting Policy: Experts and the Public, ed., Nova Publishers, New York, In press.
42. Drottz-Sjöberg, B.-M. and Sjöberg, L., Attitudes and Conceptions of Adolescents with Regard to Nuclear Power and Radioactive Wastes, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1991, 21(24), 2007-2035.
43. Cialdini, R.B. and Trost, M.R., Social Influence: Social Norms, Social Conformity, and Compliance, in: D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey, ed., The Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol. Ii, McGraw-Hill, Boston, 1998, 151-192.
44. Sjoberg, L., The Different Dynamics of Personal and General Risk, Risk Management: An International Journal, 2003, 5(3), 19-34.
45. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M., Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1980.
46. Cohen, J., et al., Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 2003.
47. Sjoberg, L., Explaining Individual Risk Perception: The Case of Nuclear Waste, Risk Management: An International Journal, 2004, 6(1), 51-64.
48. Sjoberg, L., Genetically Modified Food in the Eyes of the Public and Experts, Risk Management: An International Journal, in press.
49. Sjöberg, L., Limits of Knowledge and the Limited Importance of Trust, Risk Analysis, 2001, 21(1), 189-198.
50. Sjöberg, L., Antagonism, Trust and Perceived Risk, Risk Management., An International Journal, 2008(10), 32-55.
51. Siegrist, M. and Cvetkovich, G., Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge, Risk Analysis, 2000, 20(5), 713-719
52. Cortina, J.M., What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993, 78, 98-104
53. Sjöberg, L., Perceived Risk and Tampering with Nature, Journal of Risk Research, 2000, 3(4), 353-367.
54. Sjöberg, L., Risk Perception, Emotion, and Policy: The Case of Nuclear Technology, European Review, 2003, 11(1), 109-128.
55. Hewstone, M. and Young, L., Expectancy-Value Models of Attitude: Measurement and Combination of Evaluations and Beliefs, Journal of Applied Social Pychology, 1988, 18, 958-971.
56. Sjöberg, L., Precautionary Attitudes and the Acceptance of a Local Nuclear Waste Repository, Safety Science, in press.
57. Sjöberg, L. and Wester-Herber, M., Too Much Trust in (Social) Trust? The Importance of Epistemic Concerns and Perceived Antagonism, International Journal of Global Environmental Isssues, in press.
58. Sjöberg, L., Local Acceptance of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository, Risk Analysis, 2004, 24(3), 739-751.
59. Sjöberg, L., Opinion Och Attityder Till Förvaring Av Använt Kärnbränsle. (Opinion and Attitudes to a Repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel). 2006, SKB. Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB: Stockholm.
60. Sjöberg, L., Nuclear Waste Risk Perceptions and Attitudes in Siting a Final Repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel, in: K. Andersson, ed., Valdor 2006. Proceedings, Stockholm, 2006, 452-460.