Dealing With Risk: Why The Public And The Experts Disagree On Environmental Issues

for Decades, Policymakers And Analysts Have Been Frustrated By The Stubborn And Often Dramatic Disagreement Between Experts And The Public On Acceptable Levels Of Environmental Risk. Most Experts, For Instance, See No Severe Problem In Dealing With Nuclear Waste, Given The Precautions And Safety Levels Now In Place. Yet Public Opinion Vehemently Rejects This View, Repudiating Both The Experts' Analysis And The Evidence.

in dealing With Risk, Howard Margolis Moves Beyond The Usual Rival Rationalities Explanation Proffered By Risk Analysts For The Rift Between Expert And Lay Opinion. He Reveals The Conflicts Of Intuition That Undergird Those Concerns, And Proposes A New Approach To The Psychology Of Persuasion And Belief. Examining The Role Of Intuition, Mental Habits, And Cognitive Frameworks In The Construction Of Public Opinion, This Compelling Account Bridges The Public Policy Impasse That Has Plagued Controversial Environmental Issues.

booknews

margolis (public Policy Studies, U. Of Chicago) Explains Why Risk Analysts And Lay People Disagree So Often And Vehemently About The Dangers Of Such Environmental Factors As Nuclear Waste, The Medicine Bendictin, And Irradiated Food. Because Lay People Are Called To Balance Costs And Benefits On Complex Matters Beyond Their Normal Experience, He Reasons, They Frequently Discount Nuance And Respond More Viscerally With All-purpose Intuitions Such As Better To Be Safe Than Sorry. Annotation C. Book News, Inc., Portland, Or (booknews.com)