IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v7y1987i2p141-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Values in Risk Debates

Author

Listed:
  • Ward Edwards
  • Detlof von Winterfeldt

Abstract

Both the issues inherent in regulation of specific risks and the contexts in which such regulatory processes occur are often characterized by confusion and controversy. Tools based on multiattribute utility measurement (MAUT) can help to clarify public values in risk debates and thus to facilitate option invention and decision making. Stakeholder group representatives, in interaction with an analyst, structure their values relevant to the problem into a value tree. The analyst prepares a common tree, iterating until all stakeholder representatives accept it. Stakeholders express their values as weights on the common tree. This provides a basis for option invention and negotiation. The paper presents three illustrative applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Ward Edwards & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1987. "Public Values in Risk Debates," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 141-158, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:7:y:1987:i:2:p:141-158
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1987.tb00979.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1987.tb00979.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1987.tb00979.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ralph L. Keeney & Timothy L. McDaniels, 1999. "Identifying and Structuring Values to Guide Integrated Resource Planning at BC Gas," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 651-662, October.
    2. Branden B. Johnson, 1993. "“The Mental Model” Meets “The Planning Process”: Wrestling with Risk Communication Research and Practice," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 5-8, February.
    3. Robin Gregory & Howard Kunreuther & Doug Easterling & Ken Richards, 1991. "Incentives Policies to Site Hazardous Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 667-675, December.
    4. Graham Earl & Roland Clift, 1999. "Stakeholder value analysis: a methodology for intergrating stakeholder values into corporate enviromental investment decisions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 149-162, May.
    5. Timothy McDaniels, 2021. "Four Decades of Transformation in Decision Analytic Practice for Societal Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 491-502, March.
    6. Christina H. Drew & Timothy L. Nyerges & Thomas M. Leschine, 2004. "Promoting Transparency of Long‐Term Environmental Decisions: The Hanford Decision Mapping System Pilot Project," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1641-1664, December.
    7. Ali E. Abbas & David V. Budescu & Hsiu-Ting Yu & Ryan Haggerty, 2008. "A Comparison of Two Probability Encoding Methods: Fixed Probability vs. Fixed Variable Values," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 190-202, December.
    8. Vincent T. Covello, 1987. "Decision Analysis and Risk Management Decision Making: Issues and Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 131-139, June.
    9. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    10. Robin L. Dillon & Genevieve Lester & Richard S. John & Catherine H. Tinsley, 2012. "Differentiating Conflicts in Beliefs Versus Value Tradeoffs in the Domestic Intelligence Policy Debate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 713-728, April.
    11. Timothy McDaniels & William Trousdale, 1999. "Value-Focused Thinking in a Difficult Context: Planning Tourism for Guimaras, Philippines," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 58-70, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:7:y:1987:i:2:p:141-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.