David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:217 - 232 (1982)
An offshoot of decision analysis, risk-cost-benefit analysis (RCBA) dominates US policymaking regarding science and technology. In this paper a central normative presupposition of RCBA, called "the linearity assumption" is argued against. This is that there is a linear relationship between the actual probability of fatality and the value of avoiding a social risk or the cost of a social risk. The main object of this essay is to show that the presuppositions underlying the linearity assumption are highly questionable. It is maintained that assessors ought to give more consideration to broadening their interpretations of "unit cost" and "societal risk" and to abandoning their claims about linearity.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kristin Shrader‐Frechette (1992). Science, Democracy, and Public Policy. Critical Review 6 (2-3):255-264.
Donald C. Hubin (1994). The Moral Justification of Benefit/Cost Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 10 (02):169-.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1985). Technological Risk and Small Probabilities. Journal of Business Ethics 4 (6):431 - 445.
Peter Railton (1982). Costs and Benefits of Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Response to Bantz and MacLean. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:261 - 271.
Sven Ove Hansson (2007). Philosophical Problems in Cost–Benefit Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 23 (2):163-183.
Jonathan Wolff (2006). Risk, Fear, Blame, Shame and the Regulation of Public Safety. Economics and Philosophy 22 (3):409-427.
Kenneth Anderson, The Assumptions Behind the Assumptions in the War on Terror: Risk Assessment as an Example of Foundational Disagreement in Counterterrorism Policy.
David A. Bantz (1982). The Philosophical Basis of Cost-Risk-Benefit Analyses. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:227 - 242.
John T. Sanders (1994). The Attractiveness of Risk. American Society for Value Inquiry Newsletter 1994 (Fall).
Donald C. Hubin (1993). Book Review:Thoughtful Economic Man: Essays on Rationality, Moral Rules and Benevolence. Gay Meeks. [REVIEW] Ethics 103 (3):572-.
Ty Raterman (2012). Regulation, Compensation, and the Loss of Life: What Cost-Benefit Analysis Really Requires. Ethics, Policy and Environment 15 (1):97 - 118.
Gary E. Marchant, Douglas J. Sylvester & Kenneth W. Abbott (2008). Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 2 (1):43-60.
E. Marchant Gary, J. Sylvester Douglas & W. Abbott Kenneth (2008). Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 2 (1).
S. D. John (2007). How to Take Deontological Concerns Seriously in Risk-Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Re-Interpretation of the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (4):221-224.
Scott Campbell & Greg Currie (2006). Against Beck: In Defence of Risk Analysis. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (2):149-172.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads4 ( #195,570 of 1,005,816 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,005,816 )
How can I increase my downloads?