Skip to main content

A Dynamic Account of Rational Decision Making under Uncertainty: The Case of Risk Assessment in Hazardous Technological Systems

  • Chapter
Integrative Systems Approaches to Natural and Social Dynamics
  • 184 Accesses

Abstract

Over the past two decades, scientific views of a strong sociocultural variability of risk perception and risk acceptance have gained prominence in the social sciences, including technology assessment. However, many of the sociocultural theories of technological risk bearing ignore the experimental fact that the observed variability of risk attitudes is, to some considerable extent, not socioculturally contingent, but fits into a frequent and recurrent pattern known as the Allais paradox. This chapter outlines a recently developed approach to decision making under uncertainty which combines principles of non-linear utility theory with those of stochastic dynamic processes. The approach proves instructive when employed in the analysis of the observed variation in technological risk acceptance. The analysis includes applications to basic problems of risk assessment such as voluntary and involuntary risk bearing, aversion to risks with very low probabilities, but large potentials for damage, and observed social attitudes toward hazardous technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allais M, Hagen O (eds) (1979) Expected utility hypotheses and the Allais paradox. Reidel,Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M, Wildavsky A (1982) Risk and culture. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards W (ed) (1992) Utility theories: measurements and applications. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, Derby SL, Keeney RL (1981) Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn PC (1982) The foundations of expected utility. Reidel, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn PC (1988) Nonlinear preference and utility theory. Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • French S (1986) Decision theory. Ellis Horwood, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritzsche AF (1986) Wie sicher leben wir? Verlag TÃœV Rheinland, Köln

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger G (2001) On the statistical foundations of non-linear preference theory. European

    Google Scholar 

  • Journal of Operational Research (in press). Also preliminary paper presented to the Symposium on Modelling Choice, Zentrum für Interdisziplinäre Forschung (ZIF), Bielefeld,Germany, March 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Harless DW, Camerer CF (1994) The predictive utility of generalised expected utility theories.Economet 62:1251 -1289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Economet 47:763–791

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky S, Golding D (eds) (1992) Theories of risk. Praeger, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina MJ (1987) Decision-making in the presence of risk. Science 236: 537–543

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marris C, Langford IH, O’Riordan T (1998) A quantitative test of the cultural theory of risk perceptions: comparison with the psychometric paradigm. Risk Anal 18: 635–647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mine H, Osaki S (1970) Markovian decision processes. Elsevier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Okrent D (1981) Industrial risks. Proc R Soc London A376: 133–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner S, Cantor R (1987) How fair is safe enough? The cultural approach to societal technology choice. Risk Anal 7: 3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts FS (1976) Discrete mathematical models. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe WD (1977) An anatomy of risk. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society Study Group (1992) Risk: analysis, perception and management. The Royal Society, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneeweiss H (1966) Entscheidungskriterien bei Ungewissheit. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker PJH (1980) Experiments on decisions under risk. Nijhoff, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinn HW (1980) Ökonomische Entscheidungen bei Ungewissheit. Mohr, Tübingen. English edn (1983) Economic decisions under uncertainty. North-Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Stallen PJM, Geerts R, Vrijling HK (1996) Three conceptions of quantified societal risk. Risk Anal 16: 635–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starr C (1969) Social benefits vs technological risk. Science 165: 1232–1238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Starr C, Rudman R, Whipple C (1976) Philosophical basis for risk analysis. Ann Rev Energy 1:629–662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In: Hogarth RM,Reder WM (eds) Rational choice. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 67–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller RA, Covello V (eds) 1984 Low-probability, high-consequence risk analysis. Plenum,New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Geiger, G. (2001). A Dynamic Account of Rational Decision Making under Uncertainty: The Case of Risk Assessment in Hazardous Technological Systems. In: Matthies, M., Malchow, H., Kriz, J. (eds) Integrative Systems Approaches to Natural and Social Dynamics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56585-4_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56585-4_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-62526-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-56585-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics