IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v22y2002i1p59-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Paradigm for Managing the Risk of Ionizing Radiation?

Author

Listed:
  • Franco Romerio

Abstract

This article tackles the problem of controversies expressed by experts in the field of estimating and managing ionizing radiation risks. We analyze the paradigms that were conceived on this subject, in particular the studies carried out by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), as well as the papers stating either that the effect of low doses is relatively weak or, on the contrary, relatively serious. Uncertainties, which taint the risk estimations, assume a particular importance because they are at the origin of the request for expert and value judgments and represent the critical point of the discussions on the ionizing radiation risks. Our study allows us to look further into the problem of the paradigm's formation, uncertainties, and expert and value judgments, and provides areas for consideration that may contribute to a better understanding of certain gridlocks in the decision‐making process, as regards to environmental, health, and energy policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Franco Romerio, 2002. "Which Paradigm for Managing the Risk of Ionizing Radiation?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 59-66, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:1:p:59-66
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.t01-1-00006?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. Romerio, Franco, 1998. "The risks of the nuclear policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 239-246, February.
    2. Olivier Godard, 1999. "De l'usage du principe de précaution en univers controversé : entre débats publics et expertise," Post-Print halshs-00618221, HAL.
    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. Ludovic Gaudard & Franco Romerio, 2020. "A Conceptual Framework to Classify and Manage Risk, Uncertainty and Ambiguity: An Application to Energy Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, 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. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
    2. Nakata, T, 2002. "Analysis of the impacts of nuclear phase-out on energy systems in Japan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 363-377.

    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:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:1:p:59-66. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.