IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Risk Perception, Ambiguity, and Nuclear-Waste Transport

Listed author(s):
  • Mary Riddel


    (Economics Department, Box 6005, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA)

Although ambiguity has received ample attention in the theoretical expected-utility literature, measures of ambiguity are rare. Here, I present a framework for eliciting and estimating risk and ambiguity simultaneously using a risk ladder. The model, based on a variant of the induced-distribution approach of Hill, Perry, and Willis (2007, Estimating Knightian uncertainty with survival probability questions on the HRS, unpublished paper, University of Michigan), allows me to estimate risk and ambiguity jointly and derive the correlation between the two. The approach allows for heterogeneity and measurement error in the perceived risk distribution. I apply the model to data from a survey of perceived mortality risk from transporting radioactive waste to the proposed Yucca Mountain facility. The data suggest that the public perceives transport risk well in excess of that estimated by the U.S. Department of Energy. Moreover, the perceived risks are highly ambiguous. The success (and cost) of transport plans may hinge on planners’ ability to reassure and educate the public about the true risks of transport.

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Article provided by Southern Economic Association in its journal Southern Economic Journal.

Volume (Year): 75 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 (January)
Pages: 781-797

in new window

Handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:75:3:y:2009:p:781-797
Contact details of provider: Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:75:3:y:2009:p:781-797. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laura Razzolini)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.