L. Dendler, Mariana Morais, Jan Nikolas Hargart, J. Lourenço, Domagoj Vrbos, Paul Ortega, Kamila Sfugier Tollik, Georgios Alaveras, B. Gallani, Michelle Patel, Laura Broomfield, Ortwin Renn
{"title":"理解风险认知的参与与分析方法:生物技术领域三个案例研究的比较","authors":"L. Dendler, Mariana Morais, Jan Nikolas Hargart, J. Lourenço, Domagoj Vrbos, Paul Ortega, Kamila Sfugier Tollik, Georgios Alaveras, B. Gallani, Michelle Patel, Laura Broomfield, Ortwin Renn","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Considering growing participatory turns in regulatory scientific risk analysis, this paper compares how social scientists use participatory and analytical methods to understand risk perceptions and meet competing demands for representativeness and inclusiveness. Drawing on case studies of how three European risk agencies use participatory and analytic methods in the context of biotechnology, it confirms difficulties of analytic methods to shed light on perceptions when applied to unfamiliar topics. It also shows the potential of participatory in particular deliberative formats to engage affected populations in the risk analysis process, despite challenges in promoting inclusiveness. The cases call for the integration of methods, while remaining aware of the need to understand the mutual interplay in the constructions of risks and structural inequalities.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"866 - 882"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participatory versus analytic approaches for understanding risk perceptions: a comparison of three case studies from the field of biotechnology\",\"authors\":\"L. Dendler, Mariana Morais, Jan Nikolas Hargart, J. Lourenço, Domagoj Vrbos, Paul Ortega, Kamila Sfugier Tollik, Georgios Alaveras, B. Gallani, Michelle Patel, Laura Broomfield, Ortwin Renn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Considering growing participatory turns in regulatory scientific risk analysis, this paper compares how social scientists use participatory and analytical methods to understand risk perceptions and meet competing demands for representativeness and inclusiveness. Drawing on case studies of how three European risk agencies use participatory and analytic methods in the context of biotechnology, it confirms difficulties of analytic methods to shed light on perceptions when applied to unfamiliar topics. It also shows the potential of participatory in particular deliberative formats to engage affected populations in the risk analysis process, despite challenges in promoting inclusiveness. The cases call for the integration of methods, while remaining aware of the need to understand the mutual interplay in the constructions of risks and structural inequalities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk Research\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"866 - 882\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Participatory versus analytic approaches for understanding risk perceptions: a comparison of three case studies from the field of biotechnology
Abstract Considering growing participatory turns in regulatory scientific risk analysis, this paper compares how social scientists use participatory and analytical methods to understand risk perceptions and meet competing demands for representativeness and inclusiveness. Drawing on case studies of how three European risk agencies use participatory and analytic methods in the context of biotechnology, it confirms difficulties of analytic methods to shed light on perceptions when applied to unfamiliar topics. It also shows the potential of participatory in particular deliberative formats to engage affected populations in the risk analysis process, despite challenges in promoting inclusiveness. The cases call for the integration of methods, while remaining aware of the need to understand the mutual interplay in the constructions of risks and structural inequalities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Risk Research is an international journal that publishes peer-reviewed theoretical and empirical research articles within the risk field from the areas of social, physical and health sciences and engineering, as well as articles related to decision making, regulation and policy issues in all disciplines. Articles will be published in English. The main aims of the Journal of Risk Research are to stimulate intellectual debate, to promote better risk management practices and to contribute to the development of risk management methodologies. Journal of Risk Research is the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan.