IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v10y1991i2p263-285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing public risks: Federal earthquake policy design

Author

Listed:
  • Peter J. May

    (Associate Professor of Political Science at The University of Washington, Seattle)

Abstract

This article considers the design of federal earthquake policy as an illustration of the difficulties of addressing “public risks” when public indifference, despite general awareness of the risks, is the norm. The present federal earthquake policy attempts to overcome this indifference through strategies aimed at building local governmental commitment to risk reduction and improving nonfederal capacity to implement risk reduction programs. Because of the fundamental difficulties in influencing actions among less capable and willing jurisdictions, federal efforts have resulted in disjunctive impacts among seismic prone regions. Some “leading” communities have become more prepared, while other “lagging” communities in the same region fall further behind. The preferred approach for overcoming these gaps entails a mix of federally backed earthquake insurance coupled with development of local regulatory standards. More generally, strategies for addressing public risks entail modification of the policy tools for addressing such “private risks” as crime and job-related accidents. The changes involve mechanisms that shift from individual responsibility to shared responsibility for addressing the risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter J. May, 1991. "Addressing public risks: Federal earthquake policy design," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(2), pages 263-285.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:10:y:1991:i:2:p:263-285
    DOI: 10.2307/3325175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/3325175
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/3325175?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alvin H. Mushkatel & Joanne M. Nigg, 1987. "Opinion Congruence And The Formulation Of Seismic Safety Policies," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 6(4), pages 645-656, May.
    2. V. Kerry Smith & William H. Desvousges & F. Reed Johnson & Ann Fisher, 1990. "Can public information programs affect risk perceptions?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 41-59.
    3. Colin F. Camerer & Howard Kunreuther, 1989. "Decision processes for low probability events: Policy implications," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 565-592.
    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. A Asgary & K G Willis, 1997. "Estimating the Benefits of Construction Measures to Mitigate Earthquake Risks in Iran," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 24(4), pages 613-624, August.
    2. Raymond J. Burby, 2006. "Hurricane Katrina and the Paradoxes of Government Disaster Policy: Bringing About Wise Governmental Decisions for Hazardous Areas," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 604(1), pages 171-191, March.

    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. Robert S. Chirinko & Edward P. Harper, 1993. "Buckle up or slow down? New estimates of offsetting behavior and their implications for automobile safety regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 270-296.
    2. Shiping Liu & Ju‐Chin Huang & Gregory L. Brown, 1998. "Information and Risk Perception: A Dynamic Adjustment Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 689-699, December.
    3. de Jong, Piet & Tickle, Leonie & Xu, Jianhui, 2020. "A more meaningful parameterization of the Lee–Carter model," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-8.
    4. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    6. Ravi Dhar & William Goetzmann, 2005. "Institutional Perspectives on Real Estate Investing: The Role of Risk and Uncertainty," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm457, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jul 2005.
    7. Chang, Chiung-Ting, 2017. "Risk factors associated with flying in adverse weather: From the passengers' point of view," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 68-75.
    8. Howard Kunreuther & Mark Pauly, 2006. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina," NBER Working Papers 12503, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Gregory Poe & Richard Bishop, 1999. "Valuing the Incremental Benefits of Groundwater Protection when Exposure Levels are Known," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(3), pages 341-367, April.
    10. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2017. "Dynamic Implementation, Verification, and Detection," CARF F-Series CARF-F-416, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    11. Surminski, Swenja & Eldridge, Jillian, 2015. "Flood insurance in England: an assessment of the current and newly proposed insurance scheme in the context of rising flood risk," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66256, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Andrea Morone & Ozlem Ozdemir, 2006. "Valuing Protection against Low Probability, High Loss Risks: Experimental Evidence," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-34, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    13. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Fujin Zhou, 2021. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 275-318, December.
    14. Michael K. Lindell & Seong Nam Hwang, 2008. "Households' Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 539-556, April.
    15. Alan Berger & Case Brown & Carolyn Kousky & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The Challenge of Degraded Environments: How Common Biases Impair Effective Policy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1423-1433, September.
    16. Gianmarco León & Edward Miguel, 2017. "Risky Transportation Choices and the Value of a Statistical Life," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 202-228, January.
    17. Hoehn, John P. & Randall, Alan, 2002. "The effect of resource quality information on resource injury perceptions and contingent values," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 13-31, February.
    18. Matthew D. Rablen, 2023. "Loss Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function," Working Papers 2023013, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:1:p:189-214 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Yamamura, Eiji, 2012. "Experience of technological and natural disasters and their impact on the perceived risk of nuclear accidents after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan 2011: A cross-country analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 360-363.
    21. Tibor Besedeš & Cary Deck & Sudipta Sarangi & Mikhael Shor, 2012. "Age Effects and Heuristics in Decision Making," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(2), pages 580-595, 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:wly:jpamgt:v:10:y:1991:i:2:p:263-285. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.