Some Pitfalls of an Overemphasis on Science in Environmental Risk Management Decisions

Robin Gregory, Lee Failing, Dan Ohlson and Timothy Mcdaniels

Journal of Risk Research, 2006, vol. 9, issue 7, 717-735

Abstract: This paper addresses the question whether calls for “more” and “better” science will have the intended effect of improving the quality of decisions about environmental risks. There are reasons to be skeptical: key judgment tasks that fundamentally shape many aspects of decisions about environmental risk management lie outside the domain of science. These tasks include making value judgments explicit, integrating facts and values to create innovative alternatives, and constructively addressing conflicts about uncertainty. To bring new specificity to an old debate, we highlight six pitfalls in environmental risk decisions that can occur as the result of an overemphasis on science as the basis for management choices.

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870600799895 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:9:y:2006:i:7:p:717-735

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20

DOI: 10.1080/13669870600799895

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor

More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().