Strategic Appraisal of Environmental Risks: A Contrast Between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

Risk Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 129-142

  Dietz, Simon ^a   Morton, Alec ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Climate change; Cost benefit analysis; Discounting; Multicriteria decision analysis; Public engagement; Radioactive waste management

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC APPROACH; CARBON EMISSIONS; COMMITTEE ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENTS; DISCOUNTING; ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS; ETHICAL ISSUES; EXPERT MODELING; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS; POLITICAL CONTEXT; PROBABILISTIC FRAMEWORK; PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT; PUBLIC VALUES; SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE; STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT; STRATEGIC POLICY; UNITED KINGDOM;

CLIMATE CHANGE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; RADIOACTIVITY;

WASTE MANAGEMENT;

CARBON EMISSION; CLIMATE CHANGE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; STAKEHOLDER; STRATEGIC APPROACH; UNDERPINNING; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 78650543583     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01484.x     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. CoRWM. Managing our Radioactive Waste Safely. London Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, 2006.
2. Stern N. The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press, 2007.
3. Stern PC, Fineberg HV. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC National Academy of Sciences, 1996.
4. Beinat E, Nijkamp P (eds). Multicriteria Analysis for Land-Use Management. Berlin Springer, 2007.
5. Keeney RL, Renn O, Von Winterfeldt D. Structuring West Germany's energy objectives. Energy Policy, 1987; 15(4):352-362.
6. Egan MJ, Penfold JSS, Collier GD. Best Practicable Environmental Option for Radioactive Waste Disposal at Nuclear Sites, 2002.
7. Stagl S. Multicriteria evaluation and public participation: The case of UK energy policy. Land Use Policy, 2006; 23(1):53-62.
8. Goodwin P, Wright G. Decision Analysis for Management Judgement. Chichester, UK Wiley, 2004.
9. Morton A, Airoldi M, Phillips LD. Nuclear risk management on stage: A decision analysis perspective on the UK's committee on radioactive waste management. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(5):764-779.
10. Phillips LD. Decision conferencing. In Edwards W, Miles RF, Von Winterfeldt D (eds). Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations to Applications. Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 2007.
11. Phillips LD, Bana e Costa C. Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing. Annals of Operations Research, 2005; 154(1):51-68.
12. Phillips LD, Phillips MC. Facilitated work groups: Theory and practice. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1993; 44(3):533-549.
13. Layard R, Glaister S. Cost Benefit Analysis. Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1994.
14. Stirling A, Mayer S. A novel approach to the appraisal of technological risk: A multicriteria mapping study of a genetically modified crop. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 2001; 19:529-555.
15. Spash C. The economics of climate change a la Stern: Novel and nuanced or rhetorically restricted? Ecological Economics, 2007; 63:706-713.
16. Neumayer E. A missed opportunity: The Stern Review on climate change fails to tackle the issue of non-substitutable loss of natural capital. Global Environmental Change, 2007; 17(3-4):297-301.
17. Mendelsohn RO. Is the Stern Review an economic analysis? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2008; 2(1):45-60.
18. Dasgupta P. Comments on the Stern Review's Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge, 2006.
19. Barker T. The economics of avoiding dangerous climate change: An editorial essay on the Stern Review. Climatic Change, 2008; 89(3-4):173-194.
20. Hope C. Integrated assessment models. In Helm D (ed). Climate-Change Policy. Oxford Oxford University Press, 2005.
21. Dietz S, Stern N. Why economic analysis supports strong action on climate change: A response to the Stern Review's critics. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2008; 2(1):94-113.
22. Nordhaus WD. Managing the Global Commons: The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, MA MIT Press, 1994. x, 213 p.
23. Nordhaus WD. A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies. New Haven, CT and London Yale University Press, 2008.
24. Nordhaus WD, Boyer J. Warming the World: Economic Models of Global Warming. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press, 2000.
25. DTI. Our Energy Future: Creating a Low Carbon Economy. London Stationery Office, 2003.
26. RCEP, Energy: The Changing Climate, 22nd Report. London RCEP, 2000.
27. Meinshausen M. What does a 2degC target mean for greenhouse gas concentrations? A brief analysis based on multi-gas emission pathways and several climate sensitivity uncertainty estimates. In Schellnhuber H-J, Cramer W, Nakicenovic N, Wigley T, Yohe G. (eds). Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press, 2006.
28. Anderson D, Costs and finance of carbon abatement in the energy sector. Paper prepared for the Stern Review, 2006.
29. Collier D. CoRWM Final Evaluation Statement C2022 R08-3. Oxford Faulkland Associates, 2006.
30. Crosby N. Citizens' juries: One solution for difficult environmental questions. In Renn O, Webler T, Wiedemann P (eds). Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht Kluwer, 1995.
31. Dienel P, Renn O. Planning cells: A gate to "fractal" mediation. In Renn O, Webler T, Wiedemann P (eds). Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht Kluwer, 1995.
32. Stern N. What is the Economics of Climate Change? Discussion Paper. London HM Treasury, 2006.
33. Arnstein SR. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1969; 35(4):216-244.
34. Ackerman F. Critique of Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Alternative Approaches to Decision-Making. 2008, Friends of the Earth. Available at:, Accessed March 2009.
35. French S, Bedford T, Atherton E. Supporting ALARP decision making by cost benefit analysis and multiattribute utility theory. Journal of Risk Research, 2005; 8(3):207-223.
36. Hood C, Rothstein H, Baldwin R. The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes. Oxford Oxford University Press, 2001.
37. Radaelli CM. Diffusion without convergence: How political context shapes the adoption of regulatory impact assessment. Journal of European Public Policy, 2005; 12(5):924-943.
38. Beck U, Ritter M. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London Sage Publications, 1992.
39. Majone G. The rise of the regulatory state in Europe. West European Politics, 1994; 17:77-101.
40. North DW. A perspective on nuclear waste. Risk Analysis, 1999; 19(4):751-758.
41. DEFRA. Managing Radioactive Waste Safely-FAQ, 2009. Available at:, Accessed March 2009.
42. Easterling D. Fair rules for siting a high-level nuclear waste repository. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1992; 11(3):442-475.
43. Frey BS, Oberholzer-Gee F. Fair siting procedures: An empirical analysis of their importance and characteristics. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1996; 15(3):353-376.
44. Easterling D, Kunreuther H. The Dilemma of Siting a High-level Nuclear Waste Repository. Boston Kluwer, 1995.
45. Pescatore C, Vari A. Stepwise approach to the long-term management of radioactive waste. Journal of Risk Research, 2006; 9(1):13-40.
46. Enkvist P-A, Naucler T, Rosander J. A cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction. McKinsey Quarterly, 2007; 2007(1):35-45.
47. IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In Metz B, Davidson, Ogunlade R, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA. (eds). Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK and New York Cambridge University Press, 2007.
48. IPA Energy and Water Consulting, UK Power Sector Emissions: Targets or Reality? Edinburgh, UK: IPA Energy and Water Consulting Final Report to WWF UK, 2006.
49. Atherton L, Poole M. The problem of the UK's radioactive waste: What have we learnt? Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 2001; 26:296-301.
50. Blowers A, Lowry D, Solomon BD. The International Politics of Radioactive Waste. London Macmillan, 1991.
51. Committee on Disposition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Through Geological Isolation. Disposition of High-Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel: The Continuing Societal and Technical Challenges. Washington, DC National Academy of Sciences, 2001.
52. Slovic P, Flynn JH, Layman M. Perceived risk, trust and the politics of nuclear waste. Science, 1991; 254:1603-1607.
53. The Royal Society. Submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology Inquiry into the Management of Radioactive Waste, 1998. Available at:, Accessed March 2009.
54. Ipsos MORI. Saving the World Will Have to Wait-Most Americans Need Convincing. 2004 [cited March 23, 2010].
55. Downing P, Ballantyne J. Tipping Point or Turning Point: Social Marketing and Climate Change. London Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute, 2007.
56. Jordan A, Lorenzoni I. Is there now a political climate for policy change? Policy and politics after the Stern Review. Political Quarterly, 2007; 78(2):310-319.
57. House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs. The Economics of Climate Change, Vol. I: Report. London Stationery Office, 2005.
58. Barker F, Dutton M, Mansfield S. CoRWM Workshop on Option Assessment Methodology, August 12, 2004, Ashdown House-Major Conclusions, Decisions and Actions. CORWM Document 609, 2004.
59. Butler G, McCombie C, Pearman A. Review of Options Assessment Methodologies and Their Possible Relevance to the CoRWM Process. CoRWM Document 846, 2004.
60. McDaniels T. Peer Review Comments on "Review of Options Assessment Methodologies and Their Possible Relevance to the CORWM Process." CoRWM Document 858, 2004.
61. The Royal Society. Royal Society Comment on CORWM Strategy for Radioactive Waste. London Royal Society, 2006.
62. House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Radioactive Waste Management: An Update. London House of Lords, 2007.
63. Wilkinson P. The Managing Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) Programme: Implementation of the Recommendations of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management. Open Letter to the Secretary of State, 2007.
64. The UK Government and the Devolved Administrations. Response to the Report and Recommendations from the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). London Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2006.
65. Morton A, Phillips LD. Fifty years of probabilistic decision analysis: A view from the UK. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2009; 60:S33-S40.
66. Clemen RT. Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis. Belmont, CA Duxbury Press, 1996.
67. Dixit AK, Pindyck RS. Investment under Uncertainty. Chichester, UK Princeton, 1994.
68. Mendelsohn RO. A critique of the Stern Report. Regulation, 2006; Winter:42-46.
69. Nordhaus WD. A review of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature, 2007; 45(3):686-702.
70. Tol RSJ, Yohe GW. A review of the Stern Review. World Economics, 2006; 7(4):233-250.
71. Weitzman ML. A review of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature, 2007; 45(3):703-724.
72. Cline WR. The Economics of Global Warming. Washington, DC Institute for International Economics, 1992.
73. Beckerman W, Hepburn CJ. Ethics of the discount rate in the Stern Review. World Economics, 2007; 8(1):187-210.
74. Cole D. The Stern Review and its critics: Implications for the theory and practice of benefit-cost analysis. Natural Resources Journal, 2008; 48(1):53-90.
75. Yankelovich D. Coming to Public Judgement: Making Democracy Work in a Complex World. Syracuse, NY Syracuse University Press, 1991.
76. Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, Keeney RL, Derby SL. Acceptable Risk. Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1981.
77. Dietz T, Stern PC (eds). Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. Washington, DC National Academies Press, 2008.
78. Treasury HM. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government: Treasury Guidance, 3rd ed. London Stationery Office, 2003.