IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v8y2005i6p461-479.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consequences, morality, and time in environmental risk evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Gisela Böhm
  • Hans-Rüdiger Pfister

Abstract

Environmental risks pose a serious problem to individual and societal decision-making, and the public debate is often characterized by a conflict between morally-principled and technically oriented points of view. Drawing on previous work of Böhm and Pfister (2000), we propose a model on how environmental risks are cognitively represented and how risks are evaluated. The model suggests two evaluative pathways, evaluations of consequences and evaluation of moral considerations, each leading to a distinct set of emotions and action tendencies. Either one of these pathways may become dominant depending on the evaluative focus of the person, which, in turn, depends on the causal structure of the risk. An experimental study yields confirming evidence for this model. Furthermore, the influence of time perspective, that is, the delay of negative consequences caused by an environmental risk, is investigated. Contrary to the common assumption, only weak evidence for temporal discounting effects is found. It is concluded that environmental risks, due to their strong moral component, are partly immune to time perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Gisela Böhm & Hans-Rüdiger Pfister, 2005. "Consequences, morality, and time in environmental risk evaluation," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(6), pages 461-479, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:8:y:2005:i:6:p:461-479
    DOI: 10.1080/13669870500064143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870500064143
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669870500064143?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.

    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:8:y:2005:i:6:p:461-479. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.