In the tradition of Malcolm Gladwell, Gardner explores a new way of thinking about the decisions we make. We are the safest and healthiest human beings who ever lived, and yet irrational fear is growing, with deadly consequences — such as the 1,595 Americans killed when they made the mistake of switching from planes to cars after September 11. In part, this irrationality is caused by those — politicians, activists, and the media — who promote fear for their own gain. Culture also matters. But a more fundamental cause is human psychology. Working with risk science pioneer Paul Slovic, author Dan Gardner sets out to explain in a compulsively readable fashion just what that statement above means as to how we make decisions and run our lives. We learn that the brain has not one but two systems to analyze risk. One is primitive, unconscious, and intuitive. The other is conscious and rational. The two systems often agree, but occasionally they come to very different conclusions. When that happens, we can find ourselves worrying about what the statistics tell us is a trivial threat — terrorism, child abduction, cancer caused by chemical pollution — or shrugging off serious risks like obesity and smoking. Gladwell told us about “the black box” of our brains; Gardner takes us inside, helping us to understand how to deconstruct the information we’re bombarded with and respond more logically and adaptively to our world. Risk is cutting-edge reading.

Summarizes the presentations made at a conference on the subject of health, safety, and environmental risk. Discusses such issues as the roles and limitations of science in understanding risk, how federal agencies charged with safeguarding the public from risk decide which hazards to address, whether traditional approaches to assessing risk are working to promote and enhance public safety, the influence of politics, economics, and perceptions on risk policy, how the public perceives risk, and what role the media plays in creating those perceptions.

Government regulation of toxic substances in Canada and the United States is examined and compared in Risk, Science, and Politics. Kathryn Harrison and George Hoberg report dramatically different approaches to regulatory science in the two countries.

Over a period of several centuries, the academic study of risk has evolved as a distinct body of thought, which continues to influence conceptual developments in fields such as economics, management, politics and sociology. However, few scholarly works have given a chronological account of cultural and intellectual trends relating to the understanding and analysis of risks. Risk: A Study of its Origins, History and Politics aims to fill this gap by providing a detailed study of key turning points in the evolution of society's understanding of risk. Using a wide range of primary and secondary materials, Matthias Beck and Beth Kewell map the political origins and moral reach of some of the most influential ideas associated with risk and uncertainty at specific periods of time. The historical focus of the book makes it an excellent introduction for readers who wish to go beyond specific risk management techniques and their theoretical underpinnings, to gain an understanding of the history and politics of risk.

This unique comparative study looks at efforts to regulate carcinogenic chemicals in several Western democracies, including the United States, and finds marked national differences in how conflicting scientific interpretations and competing political interests are resolved. Whether risk issues are referred to expert committees without public debate or debated openly in a variety of forums, patterns of interaction among experts, policy makers, and the public reflect fundamental features of each country's political culture. "A provocative argument....Poses interesting questions for the sociology of science, especially science produced for public debate."—Contemporary Sociology A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation's Social Science Frontiers Series

This text explores the way we perceive risk and integrate change into our lives - insisting that these are the essential forces driving policy development today.

This unique comparative study looks at efforts to regulate carcinogenic chemicals in several Western democracies, including the United States, and finds marked national differences in how conflicting scientific interpretations and competing political interests are resolved. Whether risk issues are referred to expert committees without public debate or debated openly in a variety of forums, patterns of interaction among experts, policy makers, and the public reflect fundamental features of each country's political culture. "A provocative argument....Poses interesting questions for the sociology of science, especially science produced for public debate."—Contemporary Sociology A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation's Social Science Frontiers Series

Science and politics -- The space race : a marriage of necessity -- Climate change : a classic case of conflict -- Hydraulic fracturing : a deepening fissure -- Evolution and creationism : a classic case of resistance -- Panic reflex : pandemics, science, and politics -- Worlds, one reality : a path forward?

This book is designed as an introduction to recent social science work on risk and is intended primarily for students in sociology, social psychology, and psychology, although it will also be useful for those studying political science, government, public policy, and economics. It is written by leading experts actively involved in research in the field.

The author challenges the role of scientists and expertise in policy-making, as well as the idea of deliberative democracy. The integrity of science, politics and journalism is dissolving, the author argues. Market conditions are in play and, as a result, we have a market democracy. The book presents evidence of this concept in areas such as biotechnology, nanotechnologies, radioactive waste management, and global warming. Furthermore, branches of journalism are explored and found not to meet reasonable demands for transparency. The idea of public participation in decision-making, having been launched as a way to restore trust, has become just another area in the market where different processes of participation are being launched and promoted. As an alternative, the author proposes an awareness principle as an integral part of the representative political system.--adapted from jacket.