Advertisement

Governance of Occupational Safety and Health and Environmental Risks

  • Siegfried Radandt
  • Jorma Rantanen
  • Ortwin Renn
Chapter
Part of the Topics In Safety, Risk, Reliability And Quality book series (TSRQ, volume 13)

Occupational safety and health (OSH) activities were started in the industrialized countries already 150 years ago. Separated and specific actions were directed at accident prevention, and the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of occupational diseases. As industrialization has advanced, the complexity of safety and health problems and challenges has substantially grown, calling for more comprehensive approaches.

Such development has expanded the scope, as well as blurred the borders between specific activities. In the modern world of work, occupational safety and health are part of a complex system that involves innumerable interdependencies and interactions. These are, for instance, safety, health, well-being, aspects of the occupational and general environment, corporate policies and social responsibility, community policies and services, community social environment, workers’ families, their civil life, lifestyles and social networks, cultural and religious environments, and political and media environments.

Keywords

Environmental Risk Occupational Health Environmental Ethic Occupational Disease Occupational Health Service 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Akademie der Wissenschaften (1992) Umweltstandards. De Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  2. Albert H (1991) Traktat über kritische Vernunft. Mohr, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  3. Arvai J, Gregory R, McDaniels T (2001) Testing a Structured Decision Approach: Value Focused Thinking for Deliberative Risk Communication. Risk Analysis 21(6), 1065-1076.Google Scholar
  4. Bardach E (1996) The Eight-Step Path of Policy Analysis. Berkeley Academic Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  5. Bargatzky T, Kuschel R (Ed.) (1994) The Invention of Nature. Lang, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  6. Beck U (1996) Weltrisikogesellschaft, Weltöffentlichkeit und globale Subpolitik. Ökologische Fragen im Bezugsrahmen fabrizierter Unsicherheiten. In: Diekmann A, Jaeger CC (Eds.), Umweltsoziologie. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie and Sozialpsychologie 36 (Special Issue), 119-147.Google Scholar
  7. Behn RD, Vaupel JV (1982) Quick Analysis for Busy Decision Makers. Basic, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Birnbacher D (1991a) Mensch und Natur. Grundzüge der ökologischen Ethik. In: Bayertz K (Ed.), Praktische Philosophie. Grundorientierungen angewandter Ethik. Rowohlt, Reinbek, pp. 278-321.Google Scholar
  9. Birnbacher D (1991b) “Natur” als Maßstab menschlichen Handelns. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 45, 60-76.Google Scholar
  10. Birnbacher D (1996) Landschaftsschutz und Artenschutz. Wie weit tragen utilitaristische Begründungen? In: Nutzinger HG (Ed.), Naturschutz - Ethik - Ökonomie. Theoretische Begründungen und praktische Konsequenzen. Metropolis, Marburg, pp. 49-71.Google Scholar
  11. Birnbacher D, Schicha C (1996) Vorsorge statt Nachhaltigkeit - Ethische Grundlagen der Zukunftsverantwortung. In: Kastenholz HG, Erdmann K-H, Wolff M. (Eds.), Nachhaltige Entwicklung - Zukunftschancen für Mensch und Umwelt. Springer, Berlin, pp. 143-158.Google Scholar
  12. Callicott JB (1989) On the Intrinsic Value of Nonhuman Species. In: Callicott JB (Ed.), In Defense of the Land Ethics. Essay in Environmental Philosophy. State University of New York Press, New York, pp. 129-155.Google Scholar
  13. Chess C, Dietz Th, Shannon M (1998) Who Should Deliberate When? Human Ecology Review 5(1), 60-68.Google Scholar
  14. Coglianese C (1997) Assessing Consensus; The Promise and Performance of Negotiated Rule Making. Duke Law Journal 46, 1255-1333.Google Scholar
  15. Cohen J (1997) Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy. In: Bohman J, Rehg W (Eds.) Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 407-437.Google Scholar
  16. De-Marchi B, Ravetz JR (1999) Risk Management and Governance: A Post-Normal Science Approach. Futures 31, 743-757.Google Scholar
  17. Devall B, Sessions G (1984) Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered. Utah Peregrine Smith Press, Layton, UT.Google Scholar
  18. Dodgson J, Spackman M, Pearman A, Phillips LD (2000) Multi-Criteria Analysis: A Manual. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. London School of Economics, London.Google Scholar
  19. Edwards W (1954) The Theory of Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin 51, 380-417.Google Scholar
  20. Edwards W (1977) How to Use Multi-attribute Utility Measurement for Social Decision Making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC-7, 326-340.Google Scholar
  21. Ehrenfeld D (1993) Beginning Again: People and Nature in the New Millennium. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Einhorn HJ, Hogarth RM (1978) Confidence in Judgment: Persistence of the Illusion of Validity. Psychological Review 85, 395-416.Google Scholar
  23. Elliot R (1995) Environmental Ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  24. Fischhoff B (1975) Hindsight Versus Foresight: The Effect of Outcome Knowledge on Judgment under Uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1, 288-299.Google Scholar
  25. Fischhoff G, Goitein B, Shapiro Z (1982) The Experienced Utility of Expected Utility Approaches. In: Feather NT (Ed.), Expectations and Actions: Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum: Hillsdale, pp. 315-340.Google Scholar
  26. Foster H (2002) The Role of Experts in Risk-Based Decision Making. HSE Risk Assessment Policy Unit. Web Manuscript. www.trustnetgovernance.com/library/pdf/doc2.PDF. Trustnet-Paper, London.
  27. Frankena WK (1963) Ethics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  28. Fritsch B (1993) Ökologie und Konsensfindung: Neue Chancen und Risiken. In: Sandoz Rheinfonds (Ed.), Verhandlungen des Symposiums vom 3.-4. September 1992, Sandoz, Basel, pp. 9-22.Google Scholar
  29. Gale RP, Cordray SM (1994) Making Sense of Sustainability: Nine Answers to “What Should Be Sustained?”. Rural Sociology 59(2), 311-332.Google Scholar
  30. Galert T (1998) Biodiversität als Problem der Naturethik. Literaturreview und Bibliographie. Graue Reihe Nr. 12. Europäische Akademie zur Erforschung von Folgen wissenschaftlich-technischer Entwicklungen, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler.Google Scholar
  31. Gethmann CF (1991) Ethische Aspekte des Handelns unter Risiko. In: Lutz-Bachmann M (Ed.), Freiheit und Verantwortung. De Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 152-169.Google Scholar
  32. Gethmann CF (1998) Rationale Technikfolgenbeurteilung. In: Grundwald A. (Ed.), Rationale Technikfolgenbeurteilung. Konzepte und methodische Grundlagen. Springer, Berlin, pp. 1-7.Google Scholar
  33. Gowdy J (1997) The Value of Biodiversity. Land Economics 73(1), 25-41.Google Scholar
  34. Gregory R, McDaniels T, Fields D (2001) Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: A New Perspective for Environmental Negotiation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 20 (3),415-432.Google Scholar
  35. Habermas J (1970) Towards a Theory of Communicative Competence. Inquiry 13, 363-372.Google Scholar
  36. Habermas J (1971) Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu einer Theorie der kommunikativen Kompetenz. In: Habermas J, Luhmann N (Eds.), Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie. Was leistet die Systemforschung? Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M., pp. 101-141.Google Scholar
  37. Habermas J (1981) Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  38. Habermas J (1987a) Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. II: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  39. Habermas J (1987b) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  40. Habermas J (1991) Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  41. Hammond J, Keeney R, Raiffa H (1999) Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  42. Hansen U (1995) Marketing und soziale Verantwortung. In: Hansen U. (Ed.), Verbraucherund umweltorientiertes Marketing. Spurensuche einer dialogischen Marketingethik. Schäffer Poeschel, Stuttgart, pp. 29-45.Google Scholar
  43. Hargrove E (1989) Foundations of Environmental Ethics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  44. Hartwich H-H, Wewer G (Eds.) (1991) Regieren in der Bundesrepublik. Band 3: Systemsteuerung und “Staatskunst”: Theoretische Konzepte und empirische Befunde. Leske und Budrich, Opladen.Google Scholar
  45. Heap SH, Hollis M, Lyons B, Sugden R, Weale A (1992) The Theory of Choice: A Practical Guide. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
  46. Höffe O (1987) Politische Gerechtigkeit. Grundlegung einer kritischen Philosophie von Recht und Staat. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M..Google Scholar
  47. Höffe O (1992) Immanuel Kant. Beck, München.Google Scholar
  48. Honnefelder L (1993) Welche Natur sollen wir schützen? GAIA 2(5), 253-264.Google Scholar
  49. Hösle V (1991) Philosophie der ökologischen Krise. Beck, München.Google Scholar
  50. Howard RA (1966) Decision Analysis: Applied Decision Theory. In: Hertz DB, Melese J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Operational Research. Wiley-Interscience, New York. Reprinted in Howard and Matheson (1989), pp. 581-589.Google Scholar
  51. Howard RA (1968) The Foundations of Decision Analysis. IEEE Transactons on Systems Science and Cybernetics SSC-4(3), 211-219.Google Scholar
  52. Reprinted in Howard and Matheson (1989), pp. 97-113.Google Scholar
  53. Howard RA, Matheson JE, North DW (1972) The Decision to Seed Hurricanes. Science 176, 1191-1202. http://www.northworks.net/hurricanes.pdf.
  54. Hubig C (1993) Technik- und Wissenschaftsethik. Ein Leitfaden. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  55. Humphreys P (1977) Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory. In: Jungermann H, de Zeeuw D (Eds.), Decision Making and Change in Human Affairs. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 165-205.Google Scholar
  56. IRGC (International Risk Governance Council) (2005) Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Appraoch. IRGC, Geneva.Google Scholar
  57. Jasanoff S (1996) Beyond Epistemology: Relativism and Engagement in the Politics of Science. Social Studies of Science 26(2), 393-418.Google Scholar
  58. Jaeger CC, Renn O, Rosa EA, Webler Th (2001) Risk, Uncertainty and Rational Action. Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
  59. Jonas H (1979) Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  60. Jungermann H (1986) The Two Camps of Rationality. In: Arkes HR, Hammond KR (Eds.), Judgment and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 465-471.Google Scholar
  61. Kemp R (1985) Planning, Political Hearings, and the Politics of Discourse. In: Forester J (Ed.), Critical Theory and Public Life. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 177-201.Google Scholar
  62. Kesselring T (1994) Ökologie Global: Die Auswirkungen von Wirtschaftswachstum, Bevölkerungswachstum und zunehmendem Nord-Süd-Gefälle auf die Umwelt. In: Humboldt Studienzentrum (Ed.), Ökologie aus philosophischer Sicht. Schriftenreihe des Humboldt Studienzentrums Universität Ulm. Band 8. Universität Ulm, Ulm, pp. 39-76.Google Scholar
  63. Klinke A, Renn O (2002) A New Approach to Risk Evaluation and Management: Risk-Based, Precaution-Based and Discourse-Based Management. Risk Analysis 22(6), December, 1071-1994.Google Scholar
  64. Krebs A (1997) Naturethik im Überblick. In: Krebs A (Ed.), Naturethik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M., pp. 337-379.Google Scholar
  65. Lindbloom C (1959) The Science of Muddling Through. Public Administration Review 19, 79-99.Google Scholar
  66. Lindbloom C (1965) The Intelligence of Democracy. Decision Making through Mutual Adjustment. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  67. Luhmann N (1983) Legitimation durch Verfahren. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  68. McCarthy T (1975) Translator’s Introduction. In: Habermas J, Legitimation Crisis. Beacon Press, MA.Google Scholar
  69. Merkhofer MW (1984) Comparative Analysis of Formal Decision-Making Approaches. In: Covello VT, Menkes J, Mumpower J (Eds.), Risk Evaluation and Management. Plenum, New York, pp. 183-220.Google Scholar
  70. Meyer-Abich KM (1996) Sustainable Development? Wie nicht nur die Menschen eine “dauerhafte” Entwicklung überdauern können. In: Forum Clausthal (Ed.), Sustainable Development. Volume 1. TU Clausthal, Clausthal, pp. 10-21.Google Scholar
  71. Meyer-Abich KM (1997) Ist biologisches Produzieren natürlich? Leitbilder einer naturgemäßen Technik. GAIA 6(4), 247-252.Google Scholar
  72. Mittelstraß J (1984) Gibt es eine Letztbegründung? In: Janich P (Ed.), Methodische Philosophie. Econ, Düsseldorf, pp. 12-35.Google Scholar
  73. Mittelstraß J (1992) Leonardo-Welt. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  74. Mittelstraß J (1995) Umwelt. Bemerkungen eines Philosophen zum umweltverträglichen Wirtschaften. In: Levi HW, Danzer B (Eds.), Umweltverträgliches Wirtschaften. Von der Utopie zum operativen Ziel. Hirzel Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Stuttgart, pp. 13-22.Google Scholar
  75. Mohr H (1995) Qualitatives Wachstum. Lösung für die Zukunft? Weitbrecht, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  76. Morgan MG, Henrion M (1990) Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  77. National Research Council, Committee on Institutional Means for Assessing Risk to Public Health (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/366.html.
  78. National Research Council, Committee on Risk Characterization (1996) Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/5138.html.
  79. Nida-Rümelin J (1996a) Ethik des Risikos. In: Nida-Rümelin J. (Ed.), Angewandte Ethik. Die Bereichsethiken und ihre theoretische Fundierung. Kröner, Stuttgart, pp. 806-831.Google Scholar
  80. Nida-Rümelin J (1996b) Theoretische und Angewandte Ethik: Paradigmen, Begründungen, Bereiche. In: Nida-Rümelin J (Ed.), Angewandte Ethik. Die Bereichsethiken und ihre theoretische Fundierung. Kröner, Stuttgart, pp. 2-85.Google Scholar
  81. North DW (1968) A Tutorial Introduction to Decision Theory. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics SSC-4(3), 200-210.Google Scholar
  82. Reprinted in Howard and Matheson (1989) pp. 117-127.Google Scholar
  83. North DW, Merkhofer MW (1976) A Methodology for Analyzing Emission Control Strategies. Computers and Operations Research 3, 185-207.Google Scholar
  84. Norton BG (1987) Why Preserve Natural Variety? Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  85. Ott K (1993) Ökologie und Ethik. Ein Versuch praktischer Philosophie. Ethik in den Wissenschaften, Band 4. Attempto, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  86. Ott K (1999) Zur ethischen Bewertung von Biodiversität. Externes Gutachten für den WBGU. Unveröffentlichtes Manuskript.Google Scholar
  87. Pettit P (1991) Decision Theory and Folk Psychology. In: Bacharach M, Hurley S (Eds.), Foundations of Decision Theory: Issues and Advances. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp. 147175.Google Scholar
  88. Pickett ST, Ostfeld RS, Shachak M (1997) Towards a Comprehensive Conservation Theory. In: Pickett TA (Ed.), The Ecological Basis of Conservation. Routledge, London, pp. 384399.Google Scholar
  89. Pidgeon NF (1997) The Limits to Safety? Culture, Politics, Learning and Manmade Disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 5(1), 1-14.Google Scholar
  90. Pinkau K, Renn O (Eds.) (1998) Environmental Standards. Scientific Foundations and Rational Procedures of Regulation with Emphasis on Radiological Risk Management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  91. Raiffa H (1994) The Art and Science of Negotiation, 12th edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  92. Randall A (1988) What mainstream economists have to say about the value of biodiversity? In: Wilson EO. (Ed.), Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 217223.Google Scholar
  93. Randall A, Farmer MC (1995) Benefits, Costs, and the Safe Minimum Standard of Conservation. In: Bromley DW (Ed.), The Handbook of Environmental Economics. Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 26-44.Google Scholar
  94. Renn O (1986) Decision Analytic Tools for Resolving Uncertainty in the Energy Debate. Nuclear Engineering and Design 93(2/3), 167-180.Google Scholar
  95. Renn O (1996) Ökologisch denken - sozial handeln: Die Realisierbarkeit einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung und die Rolle der Sozial- und Kulturwissenschaften. In: Kastenholz HG, Erdmann K-H, Wolff M (Eds.), Nachhaltige Entwicklung. Zukunftschancen für Mensch und Umwelt. Springer, Berlin, pp. 79-118.Google Scholar
  96. Renn O (1997) Die Wertbaumanalyse. Ein diskursives Verfahren zur Bildung und Begründung kollektiv verbindlicher Bewertungskriterien. In: Holderegger A. (Ed.), Ökologische Ethik als Orientierungswissenschaft. Universitätsverlag, Freiburg, Schweiz, pp. 34-67.Google Scholar
  97. Renn O (1999) A Model for an Analytic-Deliberative Process in Risk Management. Environmental Science and Technology 33(18), 3049-3055.Google Scholar
  98. Renn O (2004) The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management. In: McDaniels T, Small MJ (Eds.), Risk Analysis and Society. An Interdisciplinary Characterization of the Field. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 289-366.Google Scholar
  99. Renn O, Goble, R (1996) A Regional Concept of Qualitative Growth and Sustainability Support for a Case Study in the German State of Baden-Württemberg. International Journal of Sustainable Development, and World Ecology 3, 1-22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Revermann C (1998) Was heißt hier Bioethik? TAB-Brief 15, 9-16.Google Scholar
  101. Rock M (1980) Theologie der Natur und ihre anthriopologisch-ethischen Konsequenzen. In: Birnbacher D. (Ed.), Ökologie und Ethik. Reclam, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  102. Rolston H (1994) Values in Nature and the Nature of Value. In: Attfield R, Belsey A (Eds.), Philosophy and the Natural Environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 13-30.Google Scholar
  103. Ropohl G (1991) Ob man die Ambivalenzen des technischen Fortschritts mit einer neuen Ethik meistern kann? In: Lenk H, Maring M (Eds.), Technikverantwortung. Campus, Frankfurt/M., pp. 48-78.Google Scholar
  104. Rossi J (1997) Participation Run Amok: The Costs of Mass Participation for Deliberative Agency Decisionmaking. Northwestern University Law Review 92, 173-249.Google Scholar
  105. Schmitz P (1985) Ist die Schöpfung noch zu retten? Umweltkrise und christliche Verantwortung. Echter, Würzburg.Google Scholar
  106. Schneider E, Oppermann B, Renn O (1998) Experiences from Germany: Application of a Structured Model of Public Participation in Waste Management Planning. Interact Journal of Public Participation 4(1), July, 63-72.Google Scholar
  107. Shrader-Frechette K (1988) Environmental Ethics. Boxwood Press, Pacific Grove .Google Scholar
  108. Skillington T (1997) Politics and the Struggle to Define: A Discourse Analysis of the Framing Strategies of Competing Actors in a “New” Participatory Forum. British Journal of Sociology 48(3), 493-513.Google Scholar
  109. Skinner DC (1999) Introduction to Decision Analysis, 2nd edition. New York, Probabilistic Publisher.Google Scholar
  110. Szejnwald-Brown HS, Derr P, Renn O, White AL (1993) Corporate Environmentalism in a Global Economy. Societal Values in International Technology Transfer. Quorum Books, Westport.Google Scholar
  111. Taylor P (1986) Respect for Nature. A Theory of Environmental Ethics. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  112. Tuler S (1996) Meanings, Understandings, and Interpersonal Relationships in Environmental Policy Discourse. Doctoral Dissertation. Worcester, Clark University.Google Scholar
  113. Tuler S, Webler Th (1999) Designing an Analytic Deliberative Process for Environmental Health Policy Making in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex. Risk: Health, Safety & Environment 65(10), Winter, 65-87.Google Scholar
  114. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science 211, 453-458.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  115. van Asselt MBA (2000) Perspectives on Uncertainty and Risk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  116. Vischer W (1999) Sondergutachten “Umweltethik”. Universität Tübingen, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  117. Vollmer H (1996) Akzeptanzbeschaffung: Verfahren und Verhandlungen. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 25(2), 147-164.Google Scholar
  118. von Schomberg R (1995) The Erosion of the Valuespheres. The Ways in Which Society CopesGoogle Scholar
  119. with Scientific, Moral and Ethical Uncertainty. In: von Schomberg R (Ed.), Contested Technology. Ethics, Risk and Public Debate. International Centre for Human and Public Affairs, Tilburg, pp. 13-28.Google Scholar
  120. Warren ME (1993) Can Participatory Democracy Produce Better Selves? Psychological Dimensions of Habermas Discursive Model of Democracy. Political Psychology 14, 209234.Google Scholar
  121. WBGU - Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen (2000) Welt im Wandel: Erhaltung und nachhaltige Nutzung der Biosphäre. Jahresgutachten 1999. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  122. Webler Th (1995) “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation. An Evaluative Yardstick. In: Renn O, Webler Th, Wiedemann P (Eds.), Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Evaluating New Models for Environmental Discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 35-86.Google Scholar
  123. Webler Th (1999) The Craft and Theory of Public Participation: A Dialectical Process. Risk Research 2(1), 55-71.Google Scholar
  124. Webler Th, Renn O (1995) A Brief Primer on Participation: Philosophy and Practice. In: Renn O, Webler Th, Wiedemann P (Eds.), Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Evaluating New Models for Environmental Discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 17-34.Google Scholar
  125. Weinrich H (1972) System, Diskurs, Didaktik und die Diktatur des Sitzfleisches. Merkur 8, 801-812.Google Scholar
  126. Wellmer A (1992) Konsens als Telos der sprachlichen Kommunikation? In: Giegel HJ (Ed.), Kommunikation und Konsens in modernen Gesellschaften. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M., pp. 18-30.Google Scholar
  127. Wilson EO (1984) Biophilia: The Human Bond with Other Species. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  128. Wolters G (1995) “Rio” oder die moralische Verpflichtung zum Erhalt der natürlichen Vielfalt. Zur Kritik einer UN-Ethik. GAIA 4(4), 244-249.Google Scholar
  129. Wynne B (1992) Risk and Social Learning: Reification to Engagement. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (Eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Praeger, Westport, pp. 275-297.Google Scholar
  130. Zilleßen H (1993) Die Modernisierung der Demokratie im Zeichen der Umweltproblematik. In: Zilleßen H, Dienel PC, Strubelt W (Eds.), Die Modernisierung der Demokratie. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen, pp. 17-39.Google Scholar
  131. Zimmerli WC (1993) Wandelt sich die Verantwortung mit technischem Wandel? In: Lenk H, Ropohl G (Eds.), Technik und Ethik. Reclam, Stuttgart, pp. 92-111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siegfried Radandt
    • Jorma Rantanen
      • 1
    • Ortwin Renn
      • 2
    1. 1.International Commission on Occupational HealthFinland
    2. 2.Technical UniversityGermany

    Personalised recommendations