IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v5y2002i4p391-417.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk-based decision analysis in support of precautionary policies

Author

Listed:
  • Michael L. Dekay
  • Mitchell J. Small
  • Paul S. Fischbeck
  • R. Scott Farrow
  • Alison Cullen
  • Joseph B. Kadane
  • Lester B. Lave
  • M. Granger Morgan
  • Kazuhisa Takemura

Abstract

A decision-analytic model for avoiding a risky activity is presented. The model considers the benefit and cost of avoiding the activity, the probability that the activity is unsafe, and scientific tests or studies that could be conducted to revise the probability that the activity is unsafe. For a single decision maker, thresholds are identified for his or her current subjective probability that the activity is unsafe. These thresholds indicate whether the preferred course of action is avoiding the activity without further study, engaging in the activity without further study, or conducting a test or research programme to obtain additional information and following the result. When these thresholds are low, precautionary action is more likely to be warranted. When there are multiple stakeholders, differences in their perceptions of the benefit and cost of avoidance and differences in their perceptions of the accuracy of the additional information provided by the test or research programme combine to create differences in their decision thresholds. Thus, the model allows for the rational expression of differences among parties in a way that highlights disagreements and possible paths to conflict resolution. The model is illustrated with an application to phytosanitary standards in international trade and examined in terms of recent empirical research on lay perceptions of risks, benefits, and trust. Further research is suggested to improve the elicitation of model components, as a way of fostering the legitimate application of risk-based decision analysis in precautionary policy making.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael L. Dekay & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & R. Scott Farrow & Alison Cullen & Joseph B. Kadane & Lester B. Lave & M. Granger Morgan & Kazuhisa Takemura, 2002. "Risk-based decision analysis in support of precautionary policies," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 391-417, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:5:y:2002:i:4:p:391-417
    DOI: 10.1080/13669870210166202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870210166202
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669870210166202?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svenson, Ola, 1996. "Decision Making and the Search for Fundamental Psychological Regularities: What Can Be Learned from a Process Perspective?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 252-267, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Amanda P. Rehr & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & Patricia Bradley & William S. Fisher, 2014. "The role of scientific studies in building consensus in environmental decision making: a coral reef example," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 60-87, March.
    2. Irene Lorenzoni & Nick F. Pidgeon & Robert E. O'Connor, 2005. "Dangerous Climate Change: The Role for Risk Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1387-1398, December.
    3. Anne van Aaken & Janis Antonovics & Jonathan B. Wiener, 2016. "The Tragedy of the Uncommons: On the Politics of Apocalypse," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7, pages 67-80, May.
    4. Mitchell J. Small & Ümit Güvenç & Michael L. DeKay, 2014. "When Can Scientific Studies Promote Consensus Among Conflicting Stakeholders?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(11), pages 1978-1994, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    2. Klamut Ryszard, 2012. "Assessment of decisions in the context of life attitudes," Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration, Sciendo, vol. 18(1-2), pages 159-176, January.
    3. Karelaia, Natalia, 2006. "Thirst for confirmation in multi-attribute choice: Does search for consistency impair decision performance?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 128-143, May.
    4. Carlson, Kurt A. & Pearo, Lisa Klein, 2004. "Limiting predecisional distortion by prior valuation of attribute components," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 48-59, May.
    5. Carlson, Kurt A. & Guha, Abhijit, 2011. "Leader-focused search: The impact of an emerging preference on information search," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 133-141, May.
    6. Bond, Samuel D. & Carlson, Kurt A. & Meloy, Margaret G. & Russo, J. Edward & Tanner, Robin J., 2007. "Information distortion in the evaluation of a single option," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 240-254, March.
    7. Bendoly, Elliot & Bachrach, Daniel G., 2003. "A process-based model for priority convergence in multi-period group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 534-545, August.
    8. Lundberg, C. Gustav, 2004. "Modeling and predicting emerging inference-based decisions in complex and ambiguous legal settings," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 417-432, March.
    9. Knoeri, Christof & Binder, Claudia R. & Althaus, Hans-Joerg, 2011. "Decisions on recycling: Construction stakeholders’ decisions regarding recycled mineral construction materials," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 1039-1050.
    10. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta, 2014. "Does attribute cut-off elicitation affect choice consistency? Contrasting hypothetical and real-money choice experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 16-29.
    11. Yaniv, Ilan, 2004. "Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 1-13, January.
    12. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Dirk Wilmsmann & Benedikt Niemann, 2013. "Experimental evidence on case-based decision theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 211-232, August.
    13. Ilan Yaniv, 2005. "Receiving Other People's Advice: Influence and Benefit," Discussion Paper Series dp405, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    14. Alan L. Montgomery & Shibo Li & Kannan Srinivasan & John C. Liechty, 2004. "Modeling Online Browsing and Path Analysis Using Clickstream Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 579-595, November.
    15. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
    16. McHugh, Sandie & Ranyard, Rob & Lewis, Alan, 2011. "Understanding and knowledge of credit cost and duration: Effects on credit judgements and decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 609-620, August.
    17. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta & Notaro, Sandra, 2010. "The Role Of Production Methods In Fruit Purchasing Behaviour: Hypothetical Vs Actual Consumers’ Preferences And Stated Minimum Requirements," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116426, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Kurt A. Carlson & Samuel D. Bond, 2006. "Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 410-421, March.
    19. Andersson, Patric, 2004. "Does experience matter in lending? A process-tracing study on experienced loan officers' and novices' decision behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 471-492, August.
    20. Backlund, Lars & Skaner, Ylva & Montgomery, Henry & Bring, Johan & Strender, Lars-Erik, 2003. "Doctors' decision processes in a drug-prescription task: The validity of rating scales and think-aloud reports," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 108-117, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:5:y:2002:i:4:p:391-417. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.