2000
DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.202016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Risk Management across the Globe: Insights from a Comparative Look at Sweden, Japan, and the United States

Abstract: In light of the present day risk controversies such as global warming and hormones in beef, partially caused by a more globalized world, national differences and similarities in how to manage risks become increasingly important. In this brief "perspective" we focus on how risks are managed in three nations, namely Japan, Sweden, and the United States, specifically focusing on the roles of deliberation, risk analysis, and the importance of cultural factors.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It became clear that they contained no case studies but instead presented a general analysis of regulatory models, (14,15) probalistic risk analysis, (16,17) the precautionary principle, (18,19) the concept of susceptibility in risk assessment, (20) armed forces medical operations, (21) or risk management in general. (22,23) The final sample contained 21 articles.…”
Section: Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It became clear that they contained no case studies but instead presented a general analysis of regulatory models, (14,15) probalistic risk analysis, (16,17) the precautionary principle, (18,19) the concept of susceptibility in risk assessment, (20) armed forces medical operations, (21) or risk management in general. (22,23) The final sample contained 21 articles.…”
Section: Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…( 8,51 ) One proposal on how to change the negative trend of a constantly declining trust from the public toward risk experts has been to include the public in risk decisions. ( 52,53 )…”
Section: Consequences For Risk Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(8,51) One proposal on how to change the negative trend of a constantly declining trust from the public toward risk experts has been to include the public in risk decisions. (52,53) Moreover, a concept of objectivity that is more context-bound, as it emphasizes the inclusion of different standpoints, makes it crucial for decisionmakers to consider the specific person who will be exposed to a certain risk. This prevents a detached approach where only probability and possible damage, for example, possible deaths, are estimated, and then weighed against total benefit.…”
Section: Consequences For Risk Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lofstedt et al 2000), medical conditions (e.g. Fukuda et al 2005) and genetically modified food (Nishizawa and Renn 2006).…”
Section: Risks In Japanmentioning
confidence: 99%