Communication of risk assessment information to risk managers

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 333-352

  Thompson, Kimberly M ^a   Bloom, Diane L ^b  

^a HARVARD CENTER FOR RISK ANALYSIS   (United States)

^b InFocus Research   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85015528014     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13669870050132559     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Apostolakis, G. (1990) The concept of probability in safety assessments of technological systems, Science 250, 1359-64.
2. Baird S.J.S., Cohen, J.T., Graham, J.D., Shlyakhter, A. and Evans, J.S. (1996) Noncancer risk assessment: a probabilistic alternative to current practice, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 2, 79-102.
3. Balch, G.I. and Sutton, S.M. (1995) Putting the audience first: conducting useful evaluation for a risk-related government agency, Risk Analysis 15, 163-168.
4. Browner, C. (1995) Policy for risk characterization. Washington, DC: EPA Administrator, US EPA, 21 March.
5. Caruso, M.A., Cheok, M.C., Cunningham, M.A., Holahan, G.M., King, T.L., Parry, G.W., Ramey-Smith, A.M., Rubin, M.P. and Thadani, A.C. (1998) An approach for using risk assessment in risk-informed decisions on plant-specific changes to the licensing basis, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 63, 231-42.
6. Covello, V.T. (1987) Decision analysis and risk management decision making issues and methods, Risk Analysis 7, 131-9.
7. CRARM (Commission for Risk Assessment and Risk Management) (1997) Risk Assessment and Risk Management in Regulatory Decision Making. US Congress, Washington, DC.
8. Deisler, P.F. (1988) The risk management-risk assessment interface, Environmental Science & Technology 22, 15-19.
9. EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (1986) Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment, Federal Register 51, 33994-7.
10. EPA (1996a) Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment, Federal Register 61, 17960¬18011.
11. EPA (1996b) Summary report of workshop on Monte Carlo analysis. Washington, DC, EPA Office of Research and Development. EPA/630/R-96/010, December.
12. Fischhoff, B. (1998) Communicate unto others …, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 59, 63-72.
13. Freudenburg, W.R. (1988) Perceived risk, real risk: social science and the art of probabilistic risk assessment, Science 242, 44-9.
14. Graham, J.D. and Hartwell, J.K. (1997) The Greening of Industry: A Risk Management Approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
15. Graham, J.D. and Wiener, J.B. (1995) Risk vs. Risk: Trade-offs in Protecting Health and the Environment. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Habicht, F.H. (1992) Guidance on risk characterization, Washington, DC: EPA Deputy Administrator, 26 February.
17. Ibrekk, H. and Morgan, M.G. (1987) Graphical communication of uncertain quantities to non¬technical people, Risk Analysis 7, 519-29.
18. Lave, L.B. (1987) Health and safety risk analyses: Information for better decisions, Science 236, 291-95.
19. Morgan, M.G. and Henrion, M. (1990) Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. Morgan, M.G., Morris, S.C., Henrion, M., Amaral, D.A.L. and Risk, W.B. (1984) Treating tech¬nical uncertainty in policy analysis: a sulfur air pollution example, Risk Analysis 4, 201-16.
21. Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., Lave, L. and Atman, C. (1992) Communicating risk to the public, Environmental Science & Technology 26, 2048-56.
22. Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B., Lave, L. and Fischbeck, P. (1996) A proposal for ranking risks within federal agencies, in J.C. Davies (ed.), Comparing Environmental Risks, pp. 111-47. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
23. Nichols, A.L. and Zeckhauser, R.J. (1988) The perils of prudence: how conservative risk assess¬ments distort regulation, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 8, 61-75.
24. NRC (National Research Council) (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25. NRC (1989) Improving Risk Communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. NRC (1994) Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
27. NRC (1996) Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Ohanian, E.V., Moore, J.A., Fowle, J.R., Omenn, G.S., Lewis, S.C., Gray, G.M. and North, D.W. (1997) Risk characterization: a bridge to informed decision making, Fundamental & Applied Toxicology 39, 81-8.
29. Rosenthal, A., Gray, G.M. and Graham, J.D. (1992) Legislating acceptable cancer risk from expo¬sure to toxic chemicals, Ecology Law Quarterly 19, 269-362.
30. Santos, S.L. and McCallum, D.B. (1997) Communicating to the public: using risk comparisons, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 3, 1197-1214.
31. Slovic, P. (1986) Informing and educating the public about risk, Risk Analysis 6, 403-15.
32. Tal, A. (1997) Assessing the environmental movement’s attitudes toward risk assessment, Environmental Science & Technology 31, 470A-6A.
33. Thompson, K.M. and Graham, J.D. (1996) Going beyond the single number: using probabilistic risk assessment to improve risk management, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 2, 1008-34.
34. Whipple, C. (1985) Redistributing risk, Regulation May/June, 37-44.
35. Wilson, R. and Clark, W. (1991) Risk assessment and risk management: their separation should not mean divorce, in C. Zervos (ed.), Risk Analysis, pp. 187-96. New York: Plenum Press.
36. Wilson, R. and Crouch, E.A.C. (1987) Risk assessment and comparisons: an introduction, Science 236, 267-70.
37. Zeckhauser, R. and Viscusi, W. (1990) Risk within reason, Science 248, 559-64.