Lessons Learned: Recommendations for Communicating Conflicting Evidence for Risk Characterization

The Role of Evidence in Risk Characterization: Making Sense of Conflicting Data

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 203-213

  Wiedemann, Peter M ^a   Börner, Franziska ^a   Schütz, Holger ^a  

^a FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM JÜLICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Communicating conflicting evidence; Guiding principles; Impartiality; Prudence; Risk communication; Transparency

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857620866     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9783527622351.ch16     Document Type: Chapter

References (8)

1. Slovic, P. (1999) Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield, Risk Analysis, 19, 689-701.
2. Covello, V.T. and Allen, F.W. (1988) Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication (OPA-87-020), US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
3. WHO (2002) Establishing a Dialogue on Risks from Electromagnetic Fields, World Health Organization, Geneva.
4. Foster, K.R., Bernstein,D.E. andHuber, P.W. (eds) (1993) Phantom Risk: Scientific Inference and the Law, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Schütz, H. and Wiedemann, P.M. (2005) How to deal with dissent among experts. Risk evaluation of EMF in a scientific dialogue, Journal of RiskResearch, 8, 531-545.
6. EPA (2000) Risk Characterization Handbook (EPA 100-B-00-002), US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
7. MOA (2004) Risk CommunicationHandbook-"Working with the Community", Mobile Operator Association, London [http://www.mobilemastinfo.com/planning/Risk_Communication_Handbookv2.pdf] [Retrieved: 20.03.2006].
8. Hill, A.B. (1965) The environment and disease: association or causation?, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58, 295-300.