1. 10/1/08 ESPP-781 Risk Definition, Typology, Examples Probability of harm X magnitude of harm Types of risk –low-probability, high-consequence risks nuclear power plant accident; adverse drug reactions; extreme weather events –high-probability, low-consequence risks dust; smells; some power failures; gridlock –natural vs. human-made risks aflatoxin in peanuts, wildfires vs. second-hand smoke –voluntary vs. involuntary risks driving, cycling, mountain climbing vs. environmental chemical exposure

2. 10/1/08 ESPP-782 Roundup of Risks

3. 10/1/08 ESPP-783 Recurrent Analytic Problems What is wrong with the definition of risk as probability of harm X magnitude of harm? –The problem of characterization models and their uncertainties –The problem of perception lay versus expert assessments –The problem of standpoint individual or aggregate; role of culture

4. 10/1/08 ESPP-784 Actual vs. Perceived Risk Actual (actuarial) risks: –based on reliable aggregate statistics (e.g., common accidents, common causes of death) Perceived risks: –relative ordering of risk in psychological studies Lay vs. expert risk perceptions: –risk rankings across different social groups

5. 10/1/08 ESPP-785

6. 10/1/08 ESPP-786 Why do laypeople perceive risks differently from experts? Ignorance Psychological bias –exaggerated fear of unknown –fear of loss overrides hope of gain Social explanations –historical experience of institutions –perceived lack of control –unmet ethical concerns

7. 10/1/08 ESPP-787 Experts and Laypeople Who are laypeople in relation to risk? (cf. Corburn, Wynne readings) –The risk exposed individual? –The “general public”? Can laypeople also be experts? –Popular epidemiology –Patient activists (AIDS activism) Can experts be laypeople?

8. 10/1/08 ESPP-788 Constructing the Public Who are the publics for whose benefit risk decisions should be made? Ways of defining publics: –Interested and affected persons –Stakeholders –Consumers –Activists –National publics (voters; statistical samples) What are some methods of democratizing risk decisions?

9. 10/1/08 ESPP-789 Direct democracy: referenda California –California Prop 71 (2004): state funds for stem cell research –California Prop 65 (1986): protect California citizens and the state's drinking water from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, and to inform citizens about exposures to such chemicals Switzerland –1998: Gene Protection Initiative (permit GE research) –2004: Moratorium on GMOs and GM animals

10. 10/1/08 ESPP-7810 Deliberative democracy: “public engagement” Citizen conferences: experts inform citizens; citizens vote Citizen juries: experts question each other; jury decides Consensus conferences: experts and laypeople debate issues and come to agreement GM Nation?: unique UK process for sampling public opinion