Abstract
Risk assessment is now new. Reliability and quality control techniques, the science of gambling, and economic risk analysis have been with us for decades. In general, all of these approaches have dealt with common events for which historical data may be reasonably required and the consequences can be objectively measured. Value judgments about gambles are left for managers or gamblers themselves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Lowrance, W., Of Acceptable Risk, Kaufman: Los Angeles, 1976.
Okrent, D. and H. Whipple, “An Approach to Societal Risk Acceptable Criteria and Risk Management”, UCLA-ENG-7746, June, 1977.
Otway, H., Pahner, D. and Linnerooth, J., “Social Values in Risk Acceptance”, IIASA Research Memorandum, 1975, RM-75-54.
Otway, H., “Risk Assessment and Societal Choices”, IIASA Research Memorandum, 1975, RM-75-2.
Otway, H. and Fishbein, M., “Public Attitudes and Decision Making”, IIASA Research Memorandum, 1977, RM-75-54.
Page, T., “Keeping Score: An Acutarial Approach to Zero-Infinity Dilemmas”, Energy Risk Management, (Edited by G. T. Goodman and W. D. Rowe), Academic Press, London, 1979.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commencai Nuclear Power Plants, WAS-1400 (NUREG-75/014), The Commission, Washington, D.C., 1975.
“Risk Assessment Service Group Report to the U.S. Nuclear Commission”, H. W. Lewis, Chairman, Ad Hoc Risk Assessment Service Group, September, 1978.
Rowe, W., An Anatomy of Risk, New York, Wiley and Sons, 1977.
Rowe, W. “Assessing Risk to Society”, Symposium on Risk Assessment and Hazard Control, American Chemical Society, New Orleans, LA, March 1977.
Rowe, W., “Governmental Regulation of Societal Risk”, George Washington Law Review, Vol. 45, No. 5, August, 1977.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., S. Lichtenstein, S., Read, S. and Combs, B., “How Safe is Safe Enough: A Psychometric Study of Attitudes towards Technological Risks and Benefits”, Policy Science, 1978.
Thedeen, T., “The Problems of Quantification”, Energy Risk Management, (Edited by G. T. Goodman and W. D. Rowe) Academic Press, London, 1979.
Thomas, K., Mauer, D., Fishbein, M, Otway, H, Hinkle, R. and Wimpson, D., “A Comparative Study on Public Beliefs about Five Energy Systems”, IIASA Research Memorandum, RM-78-XX, 1978.
Wilson, R., “The FDA Criteria for Assessing Carcinogens Testimony at the FDA Hearings on the Sensitivity of Method for Animal Food Additives”, (Docket No. 77N-0026), 1977.
Wilson, R. and Crouch, E., “Interspecies Comparison of Carcinogenic Potency”, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1981 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rowe, W.D. (1981). Methodology and Myth. In: Haimes, Y.Y. (eds) Risk/Benefit Analysis in Water Resources Planning and Management. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2168-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2168-0_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-2170-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-2168-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive