Science, Technology & Human Values

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Perhac, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol. 23, No. 2, 221-241 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/016224399802300204

Comparative Risk Assessment: Where Does the Public Fit In?

Ralph M. Perhac, Jr.

University of Tennessee

Comparative risk assessment (CRA) is playing an ever-increasing role in environmental policy priority setting, as manifested in national and numerous subnational comparative risk projects. It is widely accepted that public values, interests, and concerns should play an important role in CRA. However, the philosophical basis for public involvement in CRA has not been adequately explored, nor have comparative risk projects always made explicit their rationales for public involvement. The author examines the political, normative, and epistemic rationales for public involvement and explores the case for public involvement in the making of ethical, valuation, and evidentiary judgments. The author considers key issues each rationale raises, problems eachfaces, and some of the implications of each for specific aspects of CRA.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
H. Rothstein
Talking Shops or Talking Turkey?: Institutionalizing Consumer Representation in Risk Regulation
Science Technology Human Values, September 1, 2007; 32(5): 582 - 607.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
J. Abraham and C. Davis
Deficits, Expectations and Paradigms in British and American Drug Safety Assessments: Prising Open the Black Box of Regulatory Science
Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2007; 32(4): 399 - 431.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Acta SociologicaHome page
G. Sundqvist and M. Letell
Configuring the Urban Traveler: Local Adaptation of European Air Policy
Acta Sociologica, September 1, 2005; 48(3): 205 - 219.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
R. Futrell
Technical Adversarialism and Participatory Collaboration in the U.S. Chemical Weapons Disposal Program
Science Technology Human Values, October 1, 2003; 28(4): 451 - 482.
[Abstract] [PDF]