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

IF 2.4 4区 管理学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Journal of Risk Research Pub Date : 2023-05-18 DOI:10.1080/13669877.2023.2197615
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:考虑到监管科学风险分析中越来越多的参与性转向,本文比较了社会科学家如何使用参与性和分析性方法来理解风险感知,并满足对代表性和包容性的竞争需求。通过对三个欧洲风险机构如何在生物技术背景下使用参与性和分析方法的案例研究,它证实了分析方法在应用于不熟悉的主题时阐明看法的困难。报告还显示,尽管在促进包容性方面存在挑战,但参与性在特别审议形式中有潜力使受影响人口参与风险分析进程。这些情况要求综合各种方法,同时仍然认识到有必要了解风险和结构性不平等构成方面的相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Risk Research
Journal of Risk Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
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.
期刊最新文献
How is counterfactual thinking integrated in organizational risk and resilience practices? Growing utopia – undoing risk through self-sufficiency and urban gardening? Improving workplace safety through mindful organizing: participative safety self-efficacy as a mediational link between collective mindfulness and employees’ safety citizenship Community flood resilience assessment of Saadi neighborhood, Shiraz, Iran Risk communication and Covid-19 through the lens of anonymous sources
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1