Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Kontext, Konzepte und Konsequenzen der Risikoforschung: Vergleichender Überblick über sozialwissenschaftliche Ansätze in Nordamerika und Europa

  • Chapter
Gesellschaft, Technik und Risikopolitik

Part of the book series: BMFT — Risiko- und Sicherheitsforschung ((BMFT))

Zusammenfassung

Risk Assessment wird oft als drei voneinander getrennte, aber verwandte Gruppen von Aktivitäten definiert: Risikoabschätzung, ein technisch orientierter Bereich, der hauptsächlich Naturwissenschaftlern überlassen ist; Risikobewertung, worunter die Betrachtung von Problemen an der Schnittstelle zwischen technologischen und gesellschaftlichen Systemen unter dem Gesichtspunkt sozialer Werte fällt; und Risikomanagement, wobei die regulierenden und normensetzenden Aktivitäten von Verwaltungsstellen und Politikern einer Überprüfung unterzogen werden. Sozialwissenschaftler, die Risk Assessment beurteilen, können in jedem dieser drei Bereiche einen kritischen Standpunkt einnehmen, doch tun sie es zumeist in bezug auf den ersten und dritten Bereich.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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.

Literatur

  • Abelson, P. H. (1977): Public Opinion and Energy Use. Science 197, 1325.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Agrafiotis, D.; Moralt G.; Pages, J. P. (1977): Le public et le nucléaire. Nuclear Power and its Fuel Cycle 7, 309–324, IAEA, Wien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andan, O. (1977): L’impact régionale d’une centrale nucléaire. L’exemple de Fessenheim (Haut-Rhin, France). Mosella 7, 267–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailar, B. A.; Lanphier, C. M. (1978): Development of Survey Methods to Assess Survey Practices. Washington, D. C.: American Statistical Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battelle-Institut e. V. Frankfürt am Main (1977): Einstellungen und Verhalten der Bevölkerung gegenüber verschiedenen Energiegewinnungsarten. Bericht für das Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker Research Corporation (Information Services, Inc.) (1974): The Electric Utility Industry. A National Survey of Public Knowledge and Attitudes, Boston, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beker, G.; Coenen, R.; Frederichs, G. (1977): Risiko und Akzeptanz (unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kernenergie), Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Abteilung für Angewandte Systemanalyse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breach, I. (1978): Windscale Fallout. A Primer for the Age of Nuclear Controversy. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, B. M. (1976): Technology Policy and Democracy. Is the Proposed Science Court What We Need? Science 194, 29–35.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, J. (1978): Zum Stand der Risikoforschung. Kritische Analyse der theoretischen Ansätze im Bereich des Risk Assessment. Bericht für das Bundesministerium des Innern. Frankfürt am Main: Battelle-Institute. V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, J.: In diesem Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council for Science and Society (1977): The Acceptability of Risks. Chichester, Sussex: Barry Rose.

    Google Scholar 

  • Døderlein, J. M. (1977): Nuclear Power as a Public Issue. Protection of the Public Interest. Nuclear Power and its Fuel Cycle Vol. 7 pp. 43–55, IAEA, Wien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, G. und C. Krebsbach (1978): Stereotype Wahrnehmung. Ihr Einfluß auf Interaktion und Kommunikation im Bereich politischer Planung von großtechnologischen Einrichtungen. Bericht für das Bundesministerium des Innern. Frankfürt am Main: Battelle- Institut e. V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Electricité de France (1975): Les Franais et les centrales nucléaires. Paris: EDF./Direction de l’équipement (Sondage: SOFRES).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagnani, F. (1977): Le débat nucléaire en France. Paris: Association pour le Développement de l’Informatique dans les Sciences de l’Homme/Grenoble: Institut de Recherche Economique et de Planification.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagnani, F.: In diesem Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (1878): Behavioral Aspects of Cost-Benefit Analysis. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies: Their Analysis and Role in Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frantzen, D.; Schmid-Jörg, I. (1976): Sozialwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen über das Wahrnehmungsfeld der Bevölkerung im Bereich technologischer Risiken. Bericht für das Bundesministerium des Innern. Frankfürt am Main: Battelle-Institut e. V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederichs, G. (1978): Die Akzeptanzproblematik der Kernenergie. Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. H.; Brown, R. A. (1978 a): Counting Lives. Journal of Occupational Accidens 2, 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. H.; Brown, R. A. (1978b): The Acceptability of Risk: Summary Reports. Dundee, Scotland: Duncan of Jordanstone College of Art, University of Dundee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer-Wootten, B. (1976): Some Critical Issues in the Study of Canadian Attitudes Toward and Perceptions of the Use of Nuclear Power for the Production of Electricity. Proceedings des CNA Workshop „Nuclear Power and the Canadian Public“.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer-Wootten, B.; Mitson, L. (1976): Nuclear Power and the Canadian Public. A National and Regional Assessment of Public Attitudes and Perception of the Use of Nuclear Power for the Production of Electricity. Downsview, Ontario: Institute for Behavioural Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gros, J. G.; Avenhaus, R.; Linneroth, J.; Pahner, P. D.; Otway, H. J. (1974): A System Analysis Approach to Nuclear Facility Siting. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haberer, J. (1972): Politicization in Science. Science 178, 713–724.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Louis, and Associates, Inc. (1975): A Survey of Public and Leadership Attitudes Toward Nuclear Power Development in the United States. (Harris Study No. 2515).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Louis, And Associates, Inc. (1976): A Second Survey of Public and Leadership Attitudes Toward Nuclear Power Development in the United States. (Harris Study No. 2628).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harriss, R. C.; Hohenemser, C.; Kates, R. W. (1978): The Burden of Technological Hazards. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies: Their Analysis and Role in Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hohenemser, C.; Kasperson, R., Kates, R. W. (1977): The Distrust in Nuclear Power. Science 196, 25–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R.: In diesem Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasper, R. G. (1978): „Real“ vs. Perceived Risk: Implications for Policy. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies: Their Analysis and Role in Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E. (1977): Nuclear Waste Management and the Public: Considerations for Public Policy. Worcester, Mass.: Clark University (Project RARE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebsbach, C.; Scharioth, J.; Schmid-Jörg, I. G. (1978): Einstellung und Verhalten der Bevölkerung gegenüber verschiedenen Energiegewinnungsarten. Information 27. Frankfürt am Main: Battelle-Institut e. V., S. 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagadec, P. (1978): La prise en compte des grands risques dans les sociétés industrielles considérées comme avancées. Paris: Laboratoire d’économétrie, Ecole Polytechnique.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porte, T. R.; Metlay, D. (1975): Technology Observed: Attitudes of a Wary Public. Science 188, 121–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Revue Nouvelle (1975): L’énergie Qui décide en Belgique? Sonderausgabe 61, No. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Revue Nouvelle (1976): Energie nucléaire. Un choix „Sage“? Sonderausgabe 64, Nr. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littrell, W. B.; Sjöberg, G. (1976): Current Issues in Social Policy. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovins, A. B. (1977): Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace. Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maderthaner, R.; Guttmann, G.; Swatson, E.; Otway, H. J. (1978): Effect of Distance on Risk Perception. Journal of Applied Psychology 63 (3) 380–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maderthaner, R.; Pahner, P.; Guttmann, G.; Otway, H. J. (1976): Perception of Technological Risks: The Effect of Confrontation. Laxenburg, Österreich: II AS A (RM-76–53).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, A.: In diesem Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinty, L; Atherley, G. (1977): Acceptability versus Democracy. New Scientist, 12. Mai 1977, 323–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melber, B. D.; Nealey, S. M.; Hammersla, J.; Rankin, W. L. (1977): Nuclear Power and the Public: Analysis of Collected Survey Research. Seattle, Washington: Battelle Memorial Institute, Human Affairs Research Centers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H. (1976): Social Aspects of the Nuclear Power Controversy. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-76–33).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan, T. (1978): Environmental Impact Assessment and Risk Assessment in a Management Perspective. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies: Their Analysis and Role in Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J. (1977a): Present Status of Risk Assessment. In: Risk Analysis: Industry, Government and Society (10th International TNO. Converence), Den Haag, Niederlande: TNO, pp. 6–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J. (1977b): Review of Research on Identification of Factors Influencing Social Response to Technological Risks. Nuclear Power and Its Fuel Cycle 7, 95–118, IAEA, Wien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.: In diesem Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.; Edwards, W. (1977): Application of a Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique to Evaluation of Nuclear Waste Disposal Sites: A Demonstration. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-77–31).

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.; Fishbein, M. (1976): The Determinants of Attitude Formation: An Application to Nuclear Power. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-76–80).

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.; Fishbein, M. (1977): Public Attitudes and Decision Making. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-77–54).

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.; Maurer, D.; Thomas, K. (1978): Nuclear Power: The Question of Public Acceptance. Futures 10, 109–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J.; Pahner, P. D. (1976): Risk Assessment. Futures 8, 122–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pages, J. P. (1979): Résumé d’une étude d’EDF. sur l’opinion publique: à propos du thème nucléaire consideré comme thème d’expression. Laboratoire de Statistiques et d’études économiques et sociales, Départment de Protection, Centre d’études nucléaires de Fontenay-aux-Roses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. W. (1978a): The Nuclear Debate is about Values. Nature 274, 200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. W. (1978b): Social Cost Benefit Analysis and Nuclear Futures. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies. Their Analysis and Role in Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. W., Edwards, L. Bueret, G. (1978): Energy: How to Decide. Nature 272, 115–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Que Coisir? (1978): Nucléaire: Le face à face, Sonderausgabe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racine, J. B.; Greer-Wootten, B.; Golmour, G. M. (1979): De l’idéologie de l’espace a l’idéologie dans l’espace. Anglo-French Symposium on „Ideology and Geography“, University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz, J. (1977): The Risk Equations: The Political Economy of Risks. New Scientist (8. Sept. 1977) 598–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Réal, B. (1975): Le pari du nucléaire: Nucléaire et dépendence. Economie et Humanisme 223, 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riecken, H. W. (1969): Social Science and Contemporary Social Problems. Items 23, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning (1976): Nuclear Power in Ontario. Issue Paper No. 1, Toronto: The Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, H.; Johnson, M. P. (1976): Attitudes and Behavior. Annual Review of Sociology 2, 161–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Science Council of Canada (1977): Canada as a Conserver Society. Resource Uncertainties and the Need for New Technologies. Science Council Report No. 27, Ottawa: The Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. A.; Shore, A. (1974): Sociology and Policy Analysis. The American Sociologist 9, 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sills, D. L. (1976): Social Science Research and the Formation of Energy Policy. Social Impact Assessment 5, 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg, L. (1977): Strength of Belief and Risk. Report 2–77, Project „Risk Generation and Risk Assessment in a Social Perspective“. Göteborg: Department of Psychology, University of Göteborg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg, L. (1978): Risk Generation and Risk Assessment in a Social Perspective. Foresight, The Journal of Risk Management 3, 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg, L.; Torell, G.; Adrianson, L. (1978): The Structure of Energy Attitudes and Beliefs: An Interview Study. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies: Their Analysis and Role in Risk Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P.; Lichtenstein, S.; Fischhoff, B. (1978): Images of Disaster: Perception and Acceptance of Risks from Nuclear Power. The Beijer Institute International Review Seminar on „Impacts and Risks of Energy Strategies. Their Analysis and Role in Risk Management“. Stockholm, Schweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stallen, P. J. M. (1978): Een onderzoek naar de beoordeling van risicos van kernenergie. TNO Project 6, (9) 323–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stallen, P. J. M.; Meertens, R. W. (1977): Value Orientations, Evaluations and Beliefs Concerning Nuclear Energy. Nijmegen, Niederlande: Universität Nijmegen (Internal Report SO-77-02, Department of Social Psychology).

    Google Scholar 

  • Surrey, J.; Huggett, C. (1976): Opposition to Nuclear Power. A Review of International Experience. Energy Policy 4, 286–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. (1975): The Relationships Between Attitudes and Beliefs: Comments on Smith and Clark’s Classification of Belief Type and Predictive Value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32, 748–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K; Maurer, D.; Fishbein, M.; Otway, H. J.; Hinkle, R.; Simpson, D. (1980): A Comparative Study of Public Beliefs About Five Energy Systems. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-78–15).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K.; Swaton, E.; Fishbein, M.; Otway, H. J. (1980): Nuclear Energy: The Accuracy of Policy Makers’ Perceptions of Public Beliefs. Laxenburg, Österreich: IIASA (RM-78–18).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuininga, E. J. (1977): The Nuclear Debate. In: Parkinson and Rowe (Eds.) Communications, Brüssel, pp. 169–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Buiren, S. (1978): Die Kernenergie-Kontroverse im Spiegel der Tageszeitungen. Frankfürt am Main: Batteile-Institut e. V.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, D. (1977): Nuclear Power: A Social Survey. New Society 31. März 1977: Nachdruck in Atom 248 (Juni 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1978): The Politics of Nuclear Safety. New Scientist (26. Januar 1978) 208–211.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. B. Greer-Wootten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie, Bonn, Schriesheim, Deutschland

    J. Conard

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Greer-Wootten, B. (1983). Kontext, Konzepte und Konsequenzen der Risikoforschung: Vergleichender Überblick über sozialwissenschaftliche Ansätze in Nordamerika und Europa. In: Conard, J. (eds) Gesellschaft, Technik und Risikopolitik. BMFT — Risiko- und Sicherheitsforschung. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-68743-3_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-68743-3_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-68744-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-68743-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation