Acceptable Evidence: Science and Values in Risk Management (Environmental Ethics and Science Policy Series)

Discussions of science and values in risk management have largely focussed on the entry of values in judging risks, that is, issues of acceptable risk. This volume instead concentrates on the entry of values in collecting, interpreting, communicating, and evaluating the evidence of risks, that is, issues of the acceptability of evidence of risk. By focusing on acceptable evidence, this volume avoids two barriers to progress: views that assume that evidence of risk is largely a matter of objective scientific data and therefore uncontroversial, and views that assume that evidence of risk is ineluctably a matter of values and therefore not amenable to reasoned critique. This volume denies both extremes. It argues for a more constructive conclusion: that understanding the interrelations of scientific with value issues enables a critical scrutiny of risk assessments. This volume analyzes environmental and medical controversies, and assumptions underlying views about risk assessment and the scientific and statistical models used in risk management. Contributors include philosophers, policy analysts, and natural and social scientists.

Deborah G. Mayo is at Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Rachelle D. Hollander is at National Science Foundation.