The ‘Better Argument’ in Legitimate Risk Governance

Simmig, Christina Anikó

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-41104-5_5

Christina Anikó Simmig²

35 Accesses

Abstract

The previously identified lawful means to promote or enforce disaster risk reduction, that states could implement if democratic support was given, leads this chapter to examine deliberative democracy as an avenue to mobilise democratic demand for disaster risk reduction. To that end, this chapter examines how deliberative processes can mitigate the influence of distorted risk perception on public risk evaluation and explores the advantages of deliberative democracy under normative political theory. The chapter further strengthens the case for deliberative processes by discussing competing schools of thought that propose empowering experts to make ‘rational’ risk decisions for the public to mitigate the influence of distorted risk perception. The discussion highlights the flaws of such proposals with respect to their practical implementation and their compatibility with normative political theory, particularly the concept of political legitimacy.

The material well-being of a democratic society depends on its ability to rationally manage a nearly limitless variety of often competing risks. The integrity of such a society’s commitment to self-governance depends on its ability to fashion procedures that are genuinely deliberative, open, and democratic. (Kahan et al. 2006, p. 1109)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 129.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, opened for signature 4 November 1950, 213 UNTS 221 (entered into force 3 September 1953).
2.
See Sect. 1.1.2.
3.
Ivčević et al. (2021).
4.
Chambers (2003), p. 309.
5.
Renn (2008), pp. 155, 294, 333.
6.
Ibid, pp. 155, 187–188.
7.
Habermas (2015), p. 37.
8.
Renn (2008), pp. 294, 333.
9.
Gunderson (2018), p. 719.
10.
Habermas (1996), p. 304.
11.
Green (1981), p. 11.
12.
Knight and Johnson (1994), p. 286.
13.
Ibid.
14.
Estlund (2008); Christiano (2012), who refers to ‘truth sensitivity’; see further Chambers (2021), p. 153, who refers to Habermas conception of democracy.
15.
Chambers (2021), pp. 158–159; Misak (2009), p. 35; Talisse (2009), p. 46.
16.
Holst and Molander (2019), p. 541; Holst (2012), p. 41; Schäfer (2006), p. 188; Estlund and Landemore (2018).
17.
Habermas (2015), p. 37; Misak (2009), pp. 32–34.
18.
Chambers (2021), p. 154.
19.
See generally, Cerovac (2016); Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 135–136.
20.
Rawls (1971), p. 548.
21.
Grove and Meehl (1996), p. 293; van Coile (2016), pp. 32–38; see further Holst and Molander (2019), p. 553.
22.
Grove and Meehl (1996), p. 316; see further Glöckner (2016), pp. 17–18.
23.
See Renn (2008), pp. 178–179.
24.
Van Coile (2016), pp. 32–35.
25.
Ibid, p. 37.
26.
Moore (2018), p. 641, who refers to Dewey (1927).
27.
Howse (2000), p. 2330.
28.
Renn (2008), p. 307.
29.
See Fischer (1990), p. 24.
30.
See Sunstein (2005b), p. 126; Schudson (2006), p. 500; Thompson (1990), p. 22; Holst and Molander (2019), pp. 553–556; Holst and Molander (2017), p. 241, with many references.
31.
Moore (2018), p. 647, citing Fischer (2000); Holst and Molander (2017), p. 241.
32.
Runciman (2018), p. 183.
33.
Holst and Molander (2019), p. 553; Holst and Molander (2017), p. 242, citing Sunstein (2002b), Ch 3.
34.
Holst and Molander (2017), pp. 242–243.
35.
Ibid, pp. 241–243.
36.
Moore (2018), pp. 641–642, citing Kitcher (2011); Stoll (2003), p. 268; van Coile (2016), p. 37; Gunderson (2018), p. 720.
37.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 135–136.
38.
See Renn (2008), p. 96.
39.
Habermas (2015), p. 37.
40.
See Sect. 2.1.
41.
Spence and So (2021), pp. 2–3; Ivčević et al. (2021).
42.
Alemanno (2016), p. 201; Tversky and Kahneman (1974), p. 1131.
43.
Sunstein (2002a), p. 64.
44.
Ibid.
45.
See Sect. 2.3.1.
46.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 136.
47.
Ibid, p. 135.
48.
Ibid.
49.
See Sects. 2.1.5 and 2.3.1.4.
50.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 135.
51.
Baan and Klijn (2004), pp. 114, 118; Stefanovic (2003), p. 242.
52.
Baan and Klijn (2004), p. 118.
53.
Cranor (1993), p. 129; see further Hansson (2012), p. 32; see Kamm (2007), pp. 14, 17, 291–292, 295; Breakey (2015), p. 1203.
54.
Breyer (1993), Laudan (1994), Graham and Wiener (1997), Cross (1998), Sunstein (2002b), Adler and Posner (2006) and Revesz and Livermore (2008).
55.
Sunstein (2002b), pp. 7, 49; see further Cross (1998), p. 35; discussed in Shrader-Frechette (2005).
56.
Laudan (1997), pp. 24–27.
57.
Cross (1998), p. 36; see further Cranor (1993), pp. 117–118, 122–123; Ames et al. (1987), p. 277; see Gonçalves (2013), pp. 123–124; Sunstein (2004a, b).
58.
Cross (1998), p. 38; see for a similar description Cranor (1993), p. 127; Greenacre and Fleshner (2017), p. 35; Beatley (1989), p. 11.
59.
Laudan (1994); Sunstein (2002b), p. 6.
60.
Meghani (2014), p. 983; Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 63.
61.
Laudan (1994), pp. 9–12, 16, 18–22, 167; Sunstein (2002b), pp. 14–15, 30, 49, 79, 122.
62.
Shrader-Frechette (2005), p. 94.
63.
Sunstein (2002b), p. 6.
64.
Laudan (1997), pp. 24–27.
65.
Cranor (1993), p. 126; Lateef (2011), pp. 289–290; see further Rakić (2018), p. 150.
66.
Cranor (1993), pp. 123, 126–129; Mirrlees (1982); Ames et al. (1987), p. 277; see further Gonçalves (2013), pp. 123–124; Kahan et al. (2006), pp. 1074–1076.
67.
See for example, the study by Rose et al. (2007). This study examined a statistical sample of 5500 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mitigation grants between 1993 and 2003. It found the overall benefit-cost ratio to be 4:1. Another study found 102 of 117 case studies report ‘average cost-benefit ratios above the economic equilibrium’, see Hugenbusch and Neumann (2016), p. 29. Reasons for usual uncertainties in calculating the economic benefits of DRR are addressed in Childs (2013), p. 12 and in Shreve and Kelman (2014), p. 214, also cited in Albris et al. (2020), pp. 8–9.
68.
Newman et al. (2017), p. 380.
69.
Childs (2013), p. 8.
70.
Cross (1998), p. 36.
71.
Covello (1991), pp. 80–92; Stoll (2003), p. 337.
72.
Covello (1991), p. 79.
73.
Ibid.
74.
Cross (1998).
75.
Ames et al. (1987), p. 277.
76.
Sunstein (2002b), p. 8; Laudan (1994), pp. 18–20; Laudan (1997), p. 10, discussed in Shrader-Frechette (2005).
77.
Cranor (1993), p. 128.
78.
Between 2003 and 2023, 165,353 Europeans have died in disasters triggered by natural hazards in CoE member states, while technological disaster killed 9778 Europeans, see EM-DAT, CRED/UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium (as per 10 April 2023). However, it should be noted that EM-DAT considers situations or events as disasters, which overwhelms local capacity, necessitating a request to national or international level for external assistance as disaster.
79.
The White House (2020a); similarly, The White House (2020c).
80.
The United States’ Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson in an interview with Gilbert (2020).
81.
de Lazari-Radek and Singer (2017); Haworth (1984), p. 5; Gomez (2017), p. 175; Rakić (2018), p. 149.
82.
Ross and Athanassoulis (2012), pp. 838–839; Smart (1973); Byskov (2020), pp. 262–263.
83.
Zack (2011), Ch 1; see further Lateef (2011), p. 290.
84.
Cranor (1993), p. 127.
85.
Ross and Athanassoulis (2012), p. 835; Williams (1973), pp. 136–137.
86.
See, e.g., Cross (1998), p. 38; Greenacre and Fleshner (2017), p. 35.
87.
Williams (1973), pp. 136–137.
88.
See Möller (2012), p. 60; Hansson (2004); Dworkin (2015); Cranor (1993), p. 128; van de Poel and Fahlquist (2012), pp. 890–895; Shrader-Frechette (2005), pp. 103–104; Stoll (2003), p. 337.
89.
Stoll (2003), p. 337.
90.
Shrader-Frechette (2005), p. 99.
91.
The White House (2020b).
92.
Ross and Athanassoulis (2012), p. 839; Shrader-Frechette (2005), p. 99.
93.
Ross and Athanassoulis (2012), p. 839.
94.
Hansson (2012), p. 48; Möller (2012), p. 60.
95.
For a comprehensive examination of the different combinations, see Kamm (2007), Ch 9; see further Breakey (2015), pp. 1203–1214.
96.
Woollard and Howard-Snyder (2022), para 1.
97.
Kamm (2007), p. 18.
98.
Cranor (1993), pp. 127–128; Lateef (2011), p. 290; see further Schneewind (2010), p. 251; Kalokairinou (2018), p. 222; Smith (2002), p. 309; Lin and Anderson-Shaw (2009), p. 216.
99.
Cranor (1993), pp. 127–128; Kalokairinou (2018), p. 223.
100.
Scheffler (2004), p. 216.
101.
Cranor (1993), p. 127.
102.
Campbell (1967), p. 574.
103.
Smith (2002), p. 101.
104.
Ibid.
105.
Ibid.
106.
Ibid.
107.
Kamm (2007), p. 296.
108.
Renn (2008), p. 149; Renn and Klinke (2016), pp. 208–209.
109.
Habermas (1997), p. 107.
110.
Knight and Johnson (1994), p. 286.
111.
Chambers (2021), pp. 152–154; Pateman (2012), p. 8.
112.
Dietz (1994), p. 305.
113.
Renn (2008), p. 294.
114.
Dietz (1994), p. 305; see further Renn (2008), pp. 294, 319; Gunderson (2018), p. 721.
115.
Dietz (1994), p. 305; Gunderson (2018), pp. 719–721.
116.
Renn (2008), p. 319.
117.
Ibid, p. 318.
118.
See generally, ibid, pp. 187–188.
119.
Chambers (2003), p. 309; Renn (2008), pp. 319–320.
120.
Renn (2008), p. 320.
121.
Ibid.
122.
Ibid, p. 305.
123.
Gutmann and Thompson (2004), pp. 5, 136, 146; see generally Moore (2018), p. 643.
124.
Bohman (1999), p. 596.
125.
Freer et al. (2013), p. 222; see further Faulkner et al. (2007).
126.
Sun (2016), p. 32; see Raju and da Costa (2018), pp. 282–283; see further Chmutina and von Meding (2019).
127.
Briceño (2015), p. 1; Wachinger et al. (2013), p. 1062; Raju and da Costa (2018), p. 285; Chmutina and von Meding (2019).
128.
Briceño (2015), p. 1; see further Chmutina and von Meding (2019), pp. 289–290.
129.
Raju and da Costa (2018), pp. 282–283; Briceño (2015), p. 5.
130.
See Sect. 1.5.2.
131.
Briceño (2015), p. 1; Chmutina and von Meding (2019), p. 290.
132.
Freer et al. (2013), p. 198; Rougier (2013), pp. 33, 36.
133.
Freer et al. (2013), pp. 198, 222; Rougier (2013), p. 33.
134.
Freer et al. (2013), p. 222; see further Faulkner et al. (2007).
135.
Baan and Klijn (2004), p. 118.
136.
Ibid.
137.
Ibid.
138.
See Sect. 2.1.5.
139.
See Sects. 2.3.1 and 2.3.2.
140.
German Advisory Council on Global Change (1998), p. 53.
141.
Van Coile (2016), p. 32; Rougier (2013), pp. 29–32; German Advisory Council on Global Change (1998), pp. 52–53; Mastrandrea et al. (2010); Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005).
142.
See van Coile (2016), p. 38.
143.
Albris et al. (2020), p. 6.
144.
Renn et al. (2011), p. 234.
145.
Van Coile (2016), p. 38.
146.
Henriques (2016); Rashidah Paujah Ismail et al. (2018), p. 61.
147.
Capurro et al. (2021) and Caulfield et al. (2021).
148.
Caulfield et al. (2021), p. 406, citing Matthews (2020).
149.
Capurro et al. (2021), p. 2181 (11).
150.
Ibid, p. 2181 (1).
151.
Ibid; Caulfield et al. (2021).
152.
Mastrandrea et al. (2010), p. 1; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005), p. 3, which stipulated a quantitative metric for expressing the confidence level.
153.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005), para 13.
154.
Mastrandrea et al. (2010), p. 1.
155.
Ibid, Annex A, referring to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005), para 13; see further on the development Mastrandrea et al. (2011).
156.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005), para 13.
157.
Mastrandrea et al. (2010), Annex A.
158.
Moore (2018), p. 644.
159.
Cf. Renn (2008), pp. 306–309; cf. Gunderson (2018), pp. 717–718.
160.
For an overview of respective critics, see Renn (2008), p. 306.
161.
Ibid, p. 304.
162.
Chambers (2021), p. 152, citing Dryzek et al. (2019); Gastil et al. (2008); for further case study references, see Renn (2008), pp. 309, 350.
163.
See references cited in Renn (2008), p. 313.
164.
For plenty references, see ibid, pp. 309, 350.
165.
For an overview and evaluation of experiences with these applications, see ibid, pp. 347–350.
166.
See generally Gunderson (2018), p. 729.
167.
Renn (2008), p. 350 with many references.
168.
Gunderson (2018), p. 717.
169.
Ibid, pp. 715–716, citing Dietz and Stern (2008), p. 226.
170.
Renn (2008), p. 291.
171.
Gunderson (2018), pp. 715–716, citing Dietz and Stern (2008), p. 226.
172.
See Sect. 1.1.3.
173.
Paletta (2011), pp. 870–871.
174.
Scharpf (1997), p. 19; Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 2.2.1.
175.
Brettschneider (2005), p. 424; Holst (2012), p. 50.
176.
Chambers (2017), p. 270; Fung (2007), p. 449.
177.
Baade (2017), p. 311; Chambers (2003), p. 309.
178.
Estlund and Landemore (2018), p. 120.
179.
Knight and Johnson (1994), pp. 285–286; Christiano (2009), pp. 2–4; Gunderson (2018), pp. 719–720.
180.
Christiano (2009), p. 3; Knight and Johnson (1994), p. 285.
181.
Christiano (2009), p. 3; Knight and Johnson (1994), pp. 285–286.
182.
Habermas (1996).
183.
Gutmann and Thompson (2004).
184.
Peter (2017), para 4.3.
185.
Knight and Johnson (1994), pp. 281–287.
186.
Habermas (1996), p. 304.
187.
See Habermas (2015), pp. 36–39.
188.
Ibid, p. 37; see generally Holst (2012), p. 51; Misak (2009), p. 33; Baade (2017), p. 313; cf. Schumpeter (2010), p. 226.
189.
Peter (2017), para 3.3.
190.
Chambers (2003), p. 309; Christiano (2009), pp. 7–8; Misak (2009), p. 33; Estlund and Landemore (2018), pp. 123–125.
191.
Rawls (1987).
192.
Ibid, p. 4 Fn 7.
193.
Ibid, p. 13 Fn 21; Christiano (2009), pp. 8–9.
194.
Baade (2017), p. 311; Misak (2009), p. 33; Chambers (2017), p. 268; Knight and Johnson (1994), p. 284; Peter (2017), para 4.3.
195.
Chambers (2003), p. 308.
196.
Chambers (2017), pp. 268–270.
197.
See Muirhead (2015) and Bernholz (1966); see further Knight and Johnson (1994); see generally Estlund and Landemore (2018), p. 125.
198.
See Baade (2017), pp. 308, 314–315; Waldron (2012), pp. 187, 191–197; Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 1.
199.
Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 60.
200.
Goodin (1993).
201.
See Baade (2017), pp. 308, 314–315; Waldron (2012), pp. 187, 191–197; Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 1.
202.
Baade (2017), pp. 308–310.
203.
Meghani (2009), p. 133.
204.
Ibid.
205.
Ibid, p. 131.
206.
Fung (2007), p. 449.
207.
Ibid, pp. 448–449; Meghani (2009), p. 131.
208.
Baade (2017), p. 309.
209.
Fung (2007), pp. 448–449; Meghani (2009), p. 131.
210.
Fung (2007), p. 449.
211.
Baade (2017), p. 309.
212.
Muirhead (2015).
213.
Waldron (2012), p. 198, with further references; Kitcher (2011), pp. 63–65.
214.
Kitcher (2011), p. 65.
215.
Baade (2017), pp. 315–316.
216.
Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 2.2.3.
217.
Baade (2017), pp. 312–313.
218.
ECtHR, Young, James and Webster v United Kingdom, Judgment, 13 August 1981, Eur Court HR (ser A) 44, para 63; the Court confirmed this interpretation in ECtHR, Chassagnou and Others v France, Judgment, 29 April 1999, Eur Court HR III 21, p. 65 para 112 and in ECtHR, Sørensen and Rasmussen v Denmark, Judgment, 11 January 2006, Eur Court HR I 1, pp. 29–30 para 58.
219.
Schäfer (2006), p. 187; Baade (2017), pp. 316–317; Christiano and Bajaj (2022), paras 4, 4.3; Waldron (2012), pp. 200–201.
220.
Schäfer (2006), p. 187; Baade (2017), pp. 316–317; Christiano and Bajaj (2022), paras 4, 4.3; Waldron (2012), pp. 200–201.
221.
Strøm (2000), pp. 266–267.
222.
Ibid; Gunderson (2018), p. 728; Baade (2017), pp. 313, 317.
223.
Renn (2008), p. 332.
224.
Baade (2017), pp. 312–313; see Moravcsik (2004), p. 337.
225.
Christiano and Bajaj (2022), paras 2.2.1, 2.2.3; Fung (2007).
226.
Waldron (2012), p. 200.
227.
Ibid.
228.
Ibid.
229.
Chambers (2003), p. 308.
230.
Waldron (2012), p. 200.
231.
Chambers (2017), p. 270.
232.
Ibid, pp. 268, 270; Holst (2012), p. 53.
233.
Lauta (2018), p. 50.
234.
Moore (2018), pp. 641–642; Jasanoff (2003), pp. 158, 161.
235.
Holst (2014), p. 2; Holst and Molander (2017), p. 235; Holst and Molander (2019), p. 542.
236.
Moore (2014), p. 54.
237.
Jasanoff (1994); see further Vibert (2007).
238.
Rayner (2003).
239.
Rayner (2007), p. 166.
240.
See Lauta and Faure (2016), p. 183; Rayner (2007), pp. 168, 171.
241.
Swyngedouw (2010), pp. 225–227.
242.
Lavazza and Farina (2020) and Boschele (2020).
243.
Staudenmaier (2020); Lavazza and Farina (2020), pp. 1–2.
244.
Staudenmaier (2020).
245.
Baade (2017), p. 319; with respect to the European Union, see Moravcsik (2002, 2004).
246.
Bohman (1999), p. 596; see Bouchard (2016), p. 588.
247.
Moore (2018), p. 642.
248.
Chambers (2017), p. 268.
249.
Baade (2017), p. 319; Bouchard (2016).
250.
Gutmann and Thompson (2004), pp. 5, 146; see further Holst and Molander (2017), p. 242.
251.
Gutmann and Thompson (2004), pp. 5, 146; Bouchard (2016), pp. 593–594.
252.
Moore (2018), p. 644.
253.
Holst and Molander (2017), p. 242.
254.
Ibid, pp. 242–243.
255.
See Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 990; Hansson (2012), pp. 32–33.
256.
Bae et al. (2020), W23.
257.
World Health Organization, Regional Office for the Western Pacific (2020).
258.
Altmetric (2020).
259.
One study found that medical journals halved the reviewing period based on an assessment of 669 articles, Horbach (2020). Another, and more extensive, statistical study determined the median time between submission to journals’ acceptance of COVID-19 articles to be just 6 days in comparison to a typical median of around 100 days, Palayew et al. (2020).
260.
Mehra et al. (2020a, b).
261.
Mayo-Yánez (2020), Else (2020), Bajak Aleszu and Howe (2020) and Caulfield et al. (2021).
262.
Rabin (2020).
263.
Baade (2017), pp. 319–320.
264.
See ibid, p. 313.
265.
Misak (2009), p. 33; Baade (2017), p. 313.
266.
Reuchamps and Suiter (2016).
267.
Rayner (2003, 2007); Swyngedouw (2010); Vibert (2007); Cerovac (2016), p. 79.
268.
Renn (2008), pp. 96–97, citing Cross (1998) and Coglianese (1999); see further Christoforou (2003), p. 208; cf. Murphy and Gardoni (2012), pp. 989–990.
269.
Roeser et al. (2012), pp. 8–9.
270.
Peter (2017), para 4.
271.
Holst (2012), pp. 50–51.
272.
Brennan (2016); Holst (2012), p. 41.
273.
See Peter (2017), para 4.1.
274.
See ibid.
275.
Stewart (1995), p. 57; see further Jensen (2012), p. 407.
276.
Beisbart (2012); on the development of the ‘rationality’ concept in legal studies, see Stoll (2003), pp. 328–330; Roeser et al. (2012), pp. 8–9; Jensen (2012).
277.
Jensen (2012), p. 407.
278.
Horkheimer (2013), p. 2; see generally Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 137.
279.
Horkheimer (2013), p. 2.
280.
Cross (1998), p. 35; see Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 131; see for a critique of such approaches Thompson (1990).
281.
Breyer (1993), p. 55.
282.
See Sects. 1.1.2 and 2.1.
283.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 145.
284.
Breyer (1993), p. 60.
285.
Ibid.
286.
Evans (2006), p. 222.
287.
See, e.g., Slovic (1987) and Fischhoff et al. (1978).
288.
For further references, see Shrader-Frechette (1991), pp. 89–99.
289.
Brennan (2016).
290.
See generally Ganesh (2020) and Jones (2020).
291.
See, e.g., Duncan (2020) and Sanger et al. (2020).
292.
Schudson (2006), p. 500; see Fischer (1990), p. 24; see Haring (2010), p. 248; see further Holst and Molander (2019), p. 548.
293.
Jamieson (2014), p. 100.
294.
Cf. Fiorino (2018).
295.
Shearman and Smith (2007), p. 4.
296.
See generally Christiano and Bajaj (2022), paras 2–2.2.3.
297.
Holst (2012), pp. 42–43.
298.
Evans (2006), p. 217; Holst and Molander (2019), p. 541; Holst (2012), p. 43.
299.
Horkheimer (2013), p. 2.
300.
Holst (2012), p. 43; Runciman (2018), p. 122.
301.
For examples of governments with epistocratic characteristics in European history, see Holst (2012), p. 43; Runciman (2018), p. 183.
302.
Mill (1861), p. 168; Holst (2012), p. 43; Runciman (2018), p. 122.
303.
Haring (2010), pp. 160–161.
304.
Fischer (1990), p. 17.
305.
Runciman (2018), p. 180; Holst (2012), p. 41.
306.
Haring (2010), pp. 260–261.
307.
Estlund and Landemore (2018), p. 126; Runciman (2018), p. 180; see generally Mulligan (2015).
308.
Runciman (2018), p. 123.
309.
Brennan (2014, 2016).
310.
Nunan (2014), p. 89.
311.
Schumpeter (2010), pp. 241, 245; see Baade (2017), p. 310.
312.
Schumpeter (2010), p. 214; see Baade (2017), pp. 310–311; Fung (2007), p. 448, who refers to this theory as ‘minimal democracy’.
313.
Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 4.2.1.
314.
See Held (2006), pp. 146–151.
315.
Schumpeter (2010), pp. 225–227; see Fung (2007), p. 448; Held (2006), pp. 146–148.
316.
Held (2006), p. 147.
317.
Schumpeter (2010), p. 230.
318.
Held (2006), p. 148.
319.
Nunan (2014), p. 96.
320.
Christiano and Bajaj (2022), para 4.2.1.
321.
Cf. Dryzek (2001), p. 663.
322.
Runciman (2018), p. 184; see further Haring (2010), p. 249.
323.
Held (2006), pp. 152–153.
324.
Rawls (1987), p. 13 Fn 21.
325.
See on this point Held (2006), p. 153.
326.
Moravcsik (2004), p. 338.
327.
See Horkheimer (2013), p. 2.
328.
Rawls (1987).
329.
See Sect. 5.1.1.2.
330.
Cross (1998); see Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 131.
331.
Haring (2010), p. 249, with further references; Thompson (1990), p. 22.
332.
Hansson (2012), p. 29, with many references; see further Thompson (1990).
333.
Stoll (2003), p. 331; Möller (2012), p. 71.
334.
Green (1981), p. 11.
335.
See Sects. 1.1.3, 1.5.4 and 5.1.1.2.2.
336.
Hartzell-Nichols (2012), p. 948.
337.
See, e.g., Cross (1998).
338.
Thompson (1990), p. 22; see further Hansson (2012), pp. 29, 32–33.
339.
See generally Hansson (2012), pp. 32–33.
340.
Van Coile (2016), p. 37; Stoll (2003), p. 268.
341.
Hansson (2012), p. 32.
342.
See Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 990; Hansson (2012), pp. 32–33.
343.
See Rawls (1997), p. 771; Cerovac (2016), p. 79.
344.
Habermas (2015), p. 36; Cerovac (2016), pp. 77–78.
345.
Mirrlees (1982); Cranor (1993), pp. 123, 126.
346.
Hansson (2012), p. 32.
347.
Ibid.
348.
See ibid.
349.
Ibid, p. 29.
350.
Renn (2008), p. 155.
351.
Haring (2010), p. 248; see further Saretzki (1994), p. 361; Held (2006), p. 154.
352.
Haring (2010), p. 248; see further Saretzki (1994), p. 361.
353.
Runciman (2018), p. 185.
354.
Schumpeter (2010), p. 241.
355.
Held (2006), pp. 153–154.
356.
Walker (1966).
357.
Horkheimer (2013), p. 1.
358.
Stewart (1995), p. 58; see generally Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 137.
359.
Stewart (1995), pp. 58–59.
360.
Ibid, p. 59.
361.
Roeser et al. (2012), p. 9; see generally Kahan et al. (2006), pp. 1074–1076, who refers to the ‘irrational-weigher model’.
362.
Roeser et al. (2012), p. 9.
363.
Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), pp. 59–60; Baade (2017), pp. 308–313.
364.
Sunstein (2005b), p. 126; cf. Christiansen and Hallsson (2017).
365.
Sunstein (2005b); cf. Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), in particular p. 60.
366.
Sunstein (2002a), p. 102.
367.
Ibid; Sunstein (2005b), p. 126; cf. on the merit of Sunstein’s argument Christiansen and Hallsson (2017); cf. further Kahan et al. (2006) and Shrader-Frechette (2005).
368.
Slovic (2000), p. 22.
369.
Evans (2006), p. 221; see further Cross (1998), p. 37.
370.
Sunstein (2005b); see Viscusi (1992), p. 25; cf. Sunstein and Pildes (1997); Breyer (1993), pp. 55–63.
371.
See Renn (2008), p. 96, citing Cross (1998) and Coglianese (1999).
372.
For critical voices, see Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 63; Fischhoff et al. (1978), p. 130; Slovic (1987).
373.
Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 63; Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 128–130; Hartzell-Nichols (2012), p. 948; Shrader-Frechette (2005); Clarke (2010); MacLean (2012), pp. 798–799.
374.
Meghani (2014), p. 983; Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 63.
375.
Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), p. 63; Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 139–141; Viscusi (1992), Ch 2; Viscusi (2015), pp. 1123–1126; Hansson (2007), pp. 163–164.
376.
Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 985.
377.
Viscusi (1992), pp. 7–8; Sunstein (2005a), p. 353.
378.
Sunstein (2005a), pp. 352–353; Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 985; Sunstein (2005b), p. 132.
379.
Sunstein (2005a), p. 353; Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 985; MacLean (2012), p. 799.
380.
Sunstein (2005a), p. 353; Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 985.
381.
Meghani (2009), pp. 137–138.
382.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 140–141; Shrader-Frechette (1991), pp. 72–73.
383.
Meghani (2009), pp. 137–138.
384.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 141.
385.
MacLean (2012), p. 799.
386.
Sunstein and Pildes (1997), p. 141.
387.
Ibid, p. 140.
388.
Slovic (1987), p. 285.
389.
See generally Held (2006), p. 153.
390.
See Baade (2017), pp. 320–321.
391.
Howse (2000), p. 2337.
392.
Fischhoff et al. (1978), p. 149.
393.
Urbinati (2014), p. 10, quoting Holmes (1995), p. 196; Rayner (2003), p. 164; Rayner (2007), p. 168.
394.
In relation to Germany, see, e.g., Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft e. V. (2021).
395.
See Viscusi (1992), p. 25; see Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 985; Christiansen and Hallsson (2017), pp. 62–64; Ivčević et al. (2021).
396.
See generally Fung (2007), p. 449.
397.
Murphy and Gardoni (2012), p. 990; see further Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 135–136.
398.
See Sect. 5.2.1.
399.
See Walker (1966).
400.
Renn (2008), p. 96, citing Liberatore and Funtowicz (2003) and Jasanoff (2004); see further Stoll (2003), pp. 328–332.
401.
Chambers (2003), p. 309.
402.
Christiano (2020), para 5.
403.
Habermas (1996), p. 304.
404.
Gunderson (2018), p. 721.
405.
Renn (2008), p. 313.
406.
Christiano and Bajaj (2022), paras 2.2.1, 2.2.3; Walker (1966), pp. 286–289.
407.
Holst (2012), p. 52; see further Fischer (1990), pp. 21–26.
408.
Urbinati (2014), p. 10, quoting Holmes (1995), p. 196; Rayner (2003), p. 164; Rayner (2007), p. 168.
409.
Howse (2000), p. 2330.
410.
See Walker (1966).
411.
Howse (2000), p. 2335; see generally Crosweller and Wilmshurst (2013).
412.
See Walker (1966); Sunstein and Pildes (1997), pp. 145–146, who discuss Breyer’s proposal of an ‘expert cadre’.

References

Adler MD, Posner EA (2006) New foundations of cost-benefit analysis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Book Google Scholar
Albris K, Lauta KC, Raju E (2020) Disaster knowledge gaps: exploring the interface between science and policy for disaster risk reduction in Europe. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 11(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-020-00250-5
Article Google Scholar
Alemanno A (2016) Risk and regulation. In: Burgess A, Alemanno A, Zinn JO (eds) Routledge handbook of risk studies. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 191–203
Google Scholar
Altmetric (2020) Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS–CoV-2: a controlled comparison in 4 patients: overview of attention for article published in Annals of Internal Medicine, July 2020. Web Page. https://annals.altmetric.com/details/79213450. Accessed 19 June 2023
Ames BN, Magaw R, Gold LS (1987) Ranking possible carcinogenic hazards. Science 236(4799):271–280. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563506
Article Google Scholar
Baade B (2017) Der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte als Diskurswächter. In: Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentlichen Recht und Völkerrecht, vol 263. Springer, Heidelberg
Google Scholar
Baan PJ, Klijn F (2004) Flood risk perception and implications for flood risk management in the Netherlands. Int J River Basin Manag 2(2):113–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2004.9635226
Article Google Scholar
Bae S, Kim M-C, Kim JY, Cha H-H, Lim JS, Jung J, Kim M-J, Oh DK, Lee M-K, Choi S-H, Sung M, Hong S-B, Chung J-W, Kim S-H (2020) Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: a controlled comparison in 4 patients. Ann Intern Med 173(1):W22–W23. https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1342
Article Google Scholar
Bajak Aleszu, Howe J (2020) A study said covid wasn’t that deadly. The right seized it: how coronavirus research is being weaponized. The New York Times, 14 May 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/14/opinion/coronavirus-research-misinformation.html. Accessed 19 June 2023
Beatley T (1989) Towards a moral philosophy of natural disaster mitigation. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 7(1):5–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/028072708900700102
Article Google Scholar
Beisbart C (2012) A rational approach to risk? Bayesian decision theory. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 376–404
Google Scholar
Bernholz P (1966) Economic policies in a democracy. Kyklos 19(1):48–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1966.tb02492.x
Article Google Scholar
Bohman J (1999) Democracy as inquiry, inquiry as democratic: pragmatism, social science, and the cognitive division of labor. Am J Polit Sci 43(1):590. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991808
Article Google Scholar
Boschele M (2020) COVID-19 science policy, experts, and publics: why epistemic democracy matters in ecological crises. OMICS 24(8):479–482. https://doi.org/10.1089/omi.2020.0083
Article Google Scholar
Bouchard F (2016) The roles of institutional trust and distrust in grounding rational deference to scientific expertise. Perspect Sci 24(5):582–608. https://doi.org/10.1162/POSC_a_00224
Article Google Scholar
Breakey H (2015) Positive duties and human rights: challenges, opportunities and conceptual necessities. Polit Stud 63(5):1198–1215. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12150
Article Google Scholar
Brennan J (2014) Epistocracy within public reason. In: Cudd AE, Scholz SJ (eds) Philosophical perspectives on democracy in the 21st century. Springer, Cham, pp 191–204
Chapter Google Scholar
Brennan J (2016) Against democracy. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Book Google Scholar
Brettschneider C (2005) Balancing procedures and outcomes within democratic theory: core values and judicial review. Polit Stud 53(2):423–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00536.x
Article Google Scholar
Breyer S (1993) Breaking the vicious circle: toward effective risk regulation. The Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures, vol 1992. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Briceño S (2015) Looking back and beyond Sendai: 25 years of international policy experience on disaster risk reduction. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 6(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0040-y
Article Google Scholar
Byskov MF (2020) Utilitarianism and risk. J Risk Res 23(2):259–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1501600
Article Google Scholar
Campbell WF (1967) Adam Smith’s theory of justice, prudence, and beneficence. Am Econ Rev 57(2):571–577
Google Scholar
Capurro G, Jardine CG, Tustin J, Driedger M (2021) Communicating scientific uncertainty in a rapidly evolving situation: a framing analysis of Canadian coverage in early days of COVID-19. BMC Public Health 21(1):2181. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12246-x
Article Google Scholar
Caulfield T, Bubela T, Kimmelman J, Ravitsky V (2021) Let’s do better: public representations of COVID-19 science. FACETS 6(1):403–423. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0018
Article Google Scholar
Cerovac I (2016) The role of experts in a democratic society. JECS 7(2):75–88. https://doi.org/10.15503/jecs20162.75.88
Article Google Scholar
Chambers S (2003) Deliberative democratic theory. Annu Rev Polit Sci 6(1):307–326. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085538
Article Google Scholar
Chambers S (2017) Balancing epistemic quality and equal participation in a system approach to deliberative democracy. Soc Epistemol 31(3):266–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2017.1317867
Chambers S (2021) Truth, deliberative democracy, and the virtues of accuracy: is fake news destroying the public sphere? Polit Stud 69(1):147–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719890811
Article Google Scholar
Childs D (2013) Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action: Summary of Reports 2007–2013. https://www.undrr.org/quick/11319. Accessed 19 June 2023
Chmutina K, von Meding J (2019) A dilemma of language: “natural disasters” in academic literature. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 10(3):283–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-019-00232-2
Article Google Scholar
Christiano T (2009) Must democracy be reasonable? Can J Philos 39(1):1–34. https://doi.org/10.1353/cjp.0.0037
Article Google Scholar
Christiano T (2012) Rational deliberation among experts and citizens. In: Parkinson J, Mansbridge J (eds) Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 27–51
Chapter Google Scholar
Christiano T (2020) Authority. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/authority/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Google Scholar
Christiano T, Bajaj S (2022) Democracy. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/democracy/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Google Scholar
Christiansen A, Hallsson BG (2017) Democratic decision making and the psychology of risk. Les ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum 12(1):51–83. https://doi.org/10.7202/1042278ar
Article Google Scholar
Christoforou T (2003) The precautionary principle and democratizing expertise: a European legal perspective. Sci Public Policy 30(3):205–212. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780443
Article Google Scholar
Clarke S (2010) Cognitive bias and the precautionary principle: what’s wrong with the core argument in Sunstein’s laws of fear and a way to fix it. J Risk Res 13(2):163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870903126200
Article Google Scholar
Coglianese C (1999) The limits of consensus: the environmental protection system in transition: toward a more desirable future. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 41(3):28–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139159909604620
Article Google Scholar
Covello VT (1991) Risk comparisons and risk communication: issues and problems in comparing health and environmental risks. In: Kasperson RE, Stallen PJM (eds) Communicating risks to the public: international perspectives. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 79–124
Chapter Google Scholar
Cranor CF (1993) Regulating toxic substances: a philosophy of science and the law, Environmental ethics and science policy series. Oxford University Press, New York
Book Google Scholar
Cross FB (1998) Facts and values in risk assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 59(1):27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00116-6
Article Google Scholar
Crosweller HS, Wilmshurst J (2013) Natural hazards and risk: the human perspective. In: Rougier J, Hill LJ, Sparks RSJ (eds) Risk and uncertainty assessment for natural hazards. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 548–569
Chapter Google Scholar
de Lazari-Radek K, Singer P (2017) Utilitarianism: a very short introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Book Google Scholar
Dewey J (1927) The public and its problems. Holt, New York
Google Scholar
Dietz T (1994) ‘What should we do?’: human ecology and collective decision making. Hum Ecol Rev 1(2):301–309. https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2015.1.1.123
Article Google Scholar
Dietz T, Stern PC (2008) Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Google Scholar
Dryzek JS (2001) Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Polit Theory 29(5):651–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591701029005003
Article Google Scholar
Dryzek JS, Bächtiger A, Chambers S, Cohen J, Druckman JN, Felicetti A, Fishkin JS, Farrell DM, Fung A, Gutmann A, Landemore H, Mansbridge J, Marien S, Neblo MA, Niemeyer S, Setälä M, Slothuus R, Suiter J, Thompson D, Warren ME (2019) The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation. Science 363(6432):1144–1146. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw2694
Article Google Scholar
Duncan DE (2020) “Prepare, Prepare, Prepare”: why didn’t the world listen to the coronavirus Cassandras? Vanity Fair, 27 March 2020. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03/why-didnt-the-world-listen-to-the-coronavirus-cassandras. Accessed 19 June 2023
Dworkin G (2015) The nature of autonomy. Nordic J Stud Educ Policy 1(28479):1–8. https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.28479
Article Google Scholar
Else H (2020) Covid in papers: a torrent of science. Nature 588(7839):553. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03564-y
Article Google Scholar
EM-DAT, CRED/UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium. www.emdat.be. Accessed 19 June 2023
Estlund DM (2008) Democratic authority: a philosophical framework. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Google Scholar
Estlund D, Landemore H (2018) The epistemic value of democratic deliberation. In: Bächtiger A, Dryzek JS, Mansbridge JJ, Warren M (eds) The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 112–131
Google Scholar
Evans JH (2006) Between technocracy and democratic legitimation: a proposed compromise position for common morality public bioethics. J Med Philos 31(3):213–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605310600732834
Article Google Scholar
Faulkner H, Parker D, Green C, Beven K (2007) Developing a translational discourse to communicate uncertainty in flood risk between science and the practitioner. Ambio 36(7):692–703. https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[692:DATDTC]2.0.CO;2
Article Google Scholar
Fiorino DJ (2018) Can democracy handle climate change? Democratic futures. Polity, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Fischer F (1990) Technocracy and the politics of expertise. SAGE, Newbury Park
Google Scholar
Fischer F (2000) Citizens, experts, and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Duke University Press, Durham
Book Google Scholar
Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S, Read S, Combs B (1978) How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sci 9(2):127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143739
Article Google Scholar
Freer J, Beven KJ, Neal J, Schumann G, Hall J, Bates P (2013) Flood risk and uncertainty. In: Rougier J, Hill LJ, Sparks RSJ (eds) Risk and uncertainty assessment for natural hazards. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 190–233
Chapter Google Scholar
Fung A (2007) Democratic theory and political science: a pragmatic method of constructive engagement. Am Polit Sci Rev 101(3):443–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305540707030X
Article Google Scholar
Ganesh J (2020) Coronavirus and the comeback of the administrative state. Financial Times, 11 March 2020. https://www.ft.com/content/22f51a26-6385-11ea-b3f3-fe4680ea68b5. Accessed 19 June 2023
Gastil J, Black L, Moscovitz K (2008) Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Polit Commun 25(1):23–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600701807836
German Advisory Council on Global Change (1998) World in transition: strategies for managing global environmental risks. World in Transition, Berlin
Google Scholar
Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft e. V. (2021) Positionspapier des Gesamtverbandes der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft für ein zeitgemäßes und nachhaltiges Bauordnungs- und Bauplanungsrecht, das den Herausforderungen durch Klimawandel und Extremwetterereignissen zuverlässig begegnen kann. https://www.gdv.de/resource/blob/66384/3b4b78bbd97fe50268d7bdb1d42a9d58/positionspapier-bauen-data.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2023
Gilbert C (2020) Coronavirus: Sen. Ron Johnson says keep outbreak in perspective. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 18 March 2020. https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/analysis/2020/03/18/coronavirus-sen-ron-johnson-says-keep-outbreak-perspective/5074145002/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Glöckner A (2016) Psychology and disaster: why we do not see looming disasters and how our way of thinking causes them. Glob Policy 7:16–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12289
Article Google Scholar
Gomez C (2017) Ethics and disaster risk reduction including climate change adaptation. In: Kelman I, Mercer J, Gaillard JC (eds) The Routledge handbook of disaster risk reduction including climate change adaptation. Taylor & Francis, Milton, pp 174–186
Chapter Google Scholar
Gonçalves VB (2013) The precautionary principle and environmental risk management: contributions and limitations of economic models. Ambient Soc 16(4):121–138. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-753X2013000400008
Article Google Scholar
Goodin RE (1993) Democracy, preferences and paternalism. Policy Sci 26(3):229–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999718
Article Google Scholar
Graham JD, Wiener JB (1997) Risk vs. risk: tradeoffs in protecting health and the environment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Green HP (1981) The role of law in determining acceptability of risk. Ann N Y Acad Sci 363(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb20712.x
Article Google Scholar
Greenacre M, Fleshner K (2017) Distributive justice in disaster triage. UWOMJ 86(1):35–37. https://doi.org/10.5206/uwomj.v86i1.2162
Article Google Scholar
Grove WM, Meehl PE (1996) Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: the clinical-statistical controversy. Psychol Public Policy Law 2(2):293–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.2.2.293
Article Google Scholar
Gunderson R (2018) Global environmental governance should be participatory: five problems of scale. Int Sociol 33(6):715–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580918792786
Article Google Scholar
Gutmann A, Thompson DF (2004) Why deliberative democracy? Princeton University Press, Princeton
Book Google Scholar
Habermas J (1996) Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Studies in contemporary German social thought. MIT Press, Cambridge
Book Google Scholar
Habermas J (1997) Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Polity Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Habermas J (2015) Inclusion of the other: studies in political theory. Polity Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Hansson SO (2004) Weighing risks and benefits. Topoi 23(2):145–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-004-5371-z
Article Google Scholar
Hansson SO (2007) Philosophical problems in cost–benefit analysis. Econ Philos 23(2):163–183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267107001356
Article Google Scholar
Hansson SO (2012) A panorama of the philosophy of risk. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 27–54
Chapter Google Scholar
Haring S (2010) Herrschaft der Experten oder Herrschaft des Sachzwangs? – Technokratie als politikwissenschaftliches “Problem-Ensemble”. Zeitschrift für Politik 57(3):243–264. https://doi.org/10.5771/0044-3360-2010-3-243
Article Google Scholar
Hartzell-Nichols L (2012) Intergenerational risks. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 931–960
Chapter Google Scholar
Haworth L (1984) Autonomy and utility. Ethics 95(1):5–19. https://doi.org/10.1086/292594
Article Google Scholar
Held D (2006) Models of democracy, 3rd edn. Polity, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Henriques A (2016) Students’ difficulties in understanding of confidence intervals. In: Ben-Zvi D, Makar K (eds) The teaching and learning of statistics: international perspectives. Springer, Cham, pp 129–138
Chapter Google Scholar
Holmes S (1995) Passions and constraint: on the theory of liberal democracy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Google Scholar
Holst C (2012) What is epistocracy? In: Øyen SA, Lund-Olsen T, Vaage NS (eds) Sacred science? On science and its interrelations with religious worldviews. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp 41–54
Google Scholar
Holst C (2014) Why not epistocracy? Political legitimacy and ‘the fact of expertise’. In: Holst C (ed) Expertise and democracy. ARENA Centre for European Studies, Oslo, pp 1–11
Google Scholar
Holst C, Molander A (2017) Public deliberation and the fact of expertise: making experts accountable. Soc Epistemol 31(3):235–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2017.1317865
Article Google Scholar
Holst C, Molander A (2019) Epistemic democracy and the role of experts. Contemp Polit Theory 18(4):541–561. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-00299-4
Article Google Scholar
Horbach SP (2020) Pandemic publishing: medical journals strongly speed up their publication process for COVID-19. Quant Sci Stud 1(3):1056–1067. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00076
Article Google Scholar
Horkheimer M (2013) Eclipse of reason. Bloomsbury Revelations, Bloomsbury, London
Google Scholar
Howse R (2000) Democracy, science, and free trade: risk regulation on trial at the World Trade Organization. Mich Law Rev 98(7):2329–2357
Article Google Scholar
Hugenbusch D, Neumann T (2016) Cost-benefit analysis of disaster risk reduction: a synthesis for informed decision making. Aktion Deutschland Hilft e.V. https://www.aktion-deutschland-hilft.de/fileadmin/fmdam/pdf/publikationen/ADH_Studie_EN_rev3.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2023
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report on addressing uncertainties. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-uncertaintyguidancenote-1.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2023
Ivčević A, Mazurek H, Siame L, Bertoldo R, Statzu V, Agharroud K, Estrela Rego I, Mukherjee N, Bellier O (2021) Lessons learned about the importance of raising risk awareness in the Mediterranean region (North Morocco and West Sardinia, Italy). Nat Haz Earth Syst Sci 21(12):3749–3765. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-3749-2021
Article Google Scholar
Jamieson D (2014) Reason in a dark time: why the struggle against climate change failed - and what it means for our future. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Book Google Scholar
Jasanoff S (1994) The fifth branch: science advisers as policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Jasanoff S (2003) (No?) accounting for expertise. Sci Public Policy 30(3):157–162. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780542
Article Google Scholar
Jasanoff S (2004) Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In: Jasanoff S (ed) States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order. Routledge, London, pp 13–45
Chapter Google Scholar
Jensen KK (2012) A philosophical assessment of decision theory. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 405–439
Chapter Google Scholar
Jones G (2020) 10% less democracy: why you should trust elites a little more and the masses a little less. Stanford University Press, Redwood City
Book Google Scholar
Kahan DM, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J (2006) Fear of democracy: a cultural evaluation of Sunstein on risk. Harv Law Rev 119(4):1071–1109
Google Scholar
Kalokairinou E (2018) Kantian virtue ethics approaches. In: O’Mathúna DP, Dranseika V, Gordijn B (eds) Disasters: core concepts and ethical theories. Springer, Cham, pp 217–228
Chapter Google Scholar
Kamm FM (2007) Intricate ethics. Oxford University Press
Book Google Scholar
Kitcher P (2011) Science in a democratic society. Prometheus Books, Amherst
Google Scholar
Knight J, Johnson J (1994) Aggregation and deliberation: on the possibility of democratic legitimacy. Polit Theory 22(2):277–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591794022002004
Article Google Scholar
Lateef F (2011) Ethical issues in disasters. Prehosp Disaster Med 26(4):289–292. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X1100642X
Article Google Scholar
Laudan L (1994) The book of risks: fascinating facts about the chances we take every day. Wiley, New York
Google Scholar
Laudan L (1997) Danger ahead: the risks you really face on life’s highway. Wiley, New York
Google Scholar
Lauta KC (2018) Disasters and responsibility. normative issues for law following disasters. In: O’Mathúna DP, Dranseika V, Gordijn B (eds) Disasters: core concepts and ethical theories. Springer, Cham, pp 43–53
Chapter Google Scholar
Lauta KC, Faure MG (2016) Disaster risk management. In: Burgess A, Alemanno A, Zinn JO (eds) Routledge handbook of risk studies. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 179–188
Google Scholar
Lavazza A, Farina M (2020) The role of experts in the Covid-19 pandemic and the limits of their epistemic authority in democracy. Front Public Health 8:1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00356
Article Google Scholar
Liberatore A, Funtowicz S (2003) ‘Democratising’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: what does this mean, and why bother? Sci Public Policy 30(3):146–150. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780551
Article Google Scholar
Lin JY, Anderson-Shaw L (2009) Rationing of resources: ethical issues in disasters and epidemic situations. Prehosp Disaster Med 24(3):215–221. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x0000683x
Article Google Scholar
MacLean D (2012) Ethics and risk. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 791–804
Chapter Google Scholar
Mastrandrea MD, Field CB, Stocker TF, Edenhofer O, Ebi KL, Frame DJ, Held H, Kriegler E, Mach KJ, Matschoss PR, Plattner G-K, Yohe GW, Zwiers FW (2010) Guidance note for lead authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. http://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/uncertainty-guidance-note.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2023
Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Edenhofer O, Stocker TF, Field CB, Ebi KL, Matschoss PR (2011) The IPCC AR5 guidance note on consistent treatment of uncertainties: a common approach across the working groups. Clim Chang 108(4):675–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0178-6
Article Google Scholar
Matthews D (2020) French trust in science drops as coronavirus backlash begins. Times Higher Education, 8 June 2020. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/french-trust-science-drops-coronavirus-backlash-begins. Accessed 19 June 2023
Mayo-Yánez M (2020) Research during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: to “preprint” or not to “preprint”, that is the question. Med Clin (Engl Ed) 155(2):86–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2020.05.002
Article Google Scholar
Meghani Z (2009) The US’ Food and Drug Administration, normativity of risk assessment, GMOs, and American democracy. J Agric Environ Ethics 22(2):125–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-008-9133-6
Article Google Scholar
Meghani Z (2014) Risk assessment of genetically modified food and neoliberalism: an argument for democratizing the regulatory review protocol of the food and drug administration. J Agric Environ Ethics 27(6):967–989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9511-1
Article Google Scholar
Mehra MR, Desai SS, Kuy S, Henry TD, Patel AN (2020a) Retraction: cardiovascular disease, drug therapy, and mortality in Covid-19. N Engl J Med. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007621. N Engl J Med 382(26):2582. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2021225
Mehra MR, Ruschitzka F, Patel AN (2020b) Retraction—hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. Lancet 395(10240):1820. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31324-6
Article Google Scholar
Mill JS (1861) Considerations on representative government. Parker, Son, and Bourn, London
Google Scholar
Mirrlees JA (1982) The economic uses of utilitarianism. In: Sen A, Williams B (eds) Utilitarianism and beyond. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 63–84
Chapter Google Scholar
Misak C (2009) Truth and democracy: pragmatism and the deliberative virtues. In: Geenens R, Tinnevelt R (eds) Does truth matter?: Democracy and public space. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 29–39
Chapter Google Scholar
Möller N (2012) The concepts of risk and safety. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 55–85
Chapter Google Scholar
Moore A (2014) Democratic theory and expertise: between competence and consent. In: Holst C (ed) Expertise and democracy. ARENA Centre for European Studies, Oslo, pp 49–83
Google Scholar
Moore A (2018) Deliberative democracy and science. In: Bächtiger A, Dryzek JS, Mansbridge JJ, Warren M (eds) The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 639–654
Google Scholar
Moravcsik A (2002) In defence of the ‘democratic deficit’: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union. J Common Mark Stud 40(4):603–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00390
Article Google Scholar
Moravcsik A (2004) Is there a ‘democratic deficit’ in world politics? A framework for analysis. Gov Oppos 39(2):336–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00126.x
Article Google Scholar
Muirhead R (2015) Anthony Downs, an economic theory of democracy. In: Levy JT (ed) Oxford handbook of classics in contemporary political theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Mulligan T (2015) On the compatibility of epistocracy and public reason. Soc Theory Pract 41(3):458–476. https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract201541324
Article Google Scholar
Murphy C, Gardoni P (2012) The capability approach in risk analysis. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 980–997
Google Scholar
Newman JP, Maier HR, Riddell GA, Zecchin AC, Daniell JE, Schaefer AM, van Delden H, Khazai B, O’Flaherty MJ, Newland CP (2017) Review of literature on decision support systems for natural hazard risk reduction: current status and future research directions. Environ Model Softw 96:378–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.042
Article Google Scholar
Nunan R (2014) Proportional representation, the single transferable vote, and electoral pragmatism. In: Cudd AE, Scholz SJ (eds) Philosophical perspectives on democracy in the 21st century. Springer, Cham, pp 87–101
Chapter Google Scholar
Palayew A, Norgaard O, Safreed-Harmon K, Andersen TH, Rasmussen LN, Lazarus JV (2020) Pandemic publishing poses a new COVID-19 challenge. Nat Hum Behav 4(7):666–669. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0911-0
Article Google Scholar
Paletta D (2011) Political legitimacy. In: Chatterjee DK (ed) Encyclopedia of global justice. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 870–872
Chapter Google Scholar
Pateman C (2012) Participatory democracy revisited. Perspect Polit 10(1):7–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592711004877
Article Google Scholar
Peter F (2017) Political legitimacy. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legitimacy/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Google Scholar
Rabin RC (2020) The pandemic claims new victims: prestigious medical journals. The New York Times, 14 June 2020, updated on 16 June 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/14/health/virus-journals.html. Accessed 19 June 2023
Raju E, da Costa K (2018) Governance in the Sendai: a way ahead? Disaster Prev Manag 27(3):278–291. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-08-2017-0190
Article Google Scholar
Rakić V (2018) Disaster consequentialism. In: O’Mathúna DP, Dranseika V, Gordijn B (eds) Disasters: core concepts and ethical theories. Springer, Cham, pp 145–156
Chapter Google Scholar
Rashidah Paujah Ismail N, Abdol Razak F, Baharun N (2018) Investigating students’ difficulties in understanding confidence intervals in linear regression models. IJET 7(4.33):60–64. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.33.23485
Article Google Scholar
Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Book Google Scholar
Rawls J (1987) The idea of an overlapping consensus. Oxf J Leg Stud 7(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/7.1.1
Article Google Scholar
Rawls J (1997) The idea of public reason revisited. Univ Chic Law Rev 64(3):765. https://doi.org/10.2307/1600311
Article Google Scholar
Rayner S (2003) Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making. Sci Public Policy 30(3):163–170. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780533
Article Google Scholar
Rayner S (2007) The rise of risk and the decline of politics. Environ Haz 7(2):165–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.05.003
Article Google Scholar
Renn O (2008) Risk governance: coping with uncertainty in a complex world, Earthscan risk in society series. Routledge, London
Google Scholar
Renn O, Klinke A (2016) Risk governance: concept and application to technological risk. In: Burgess A, Alemanno A, Zinn JO (eds) Routledge handbook of risk studies. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 204–215
Google Scholar
Renn O, Klinke A, van Asselt M (2011) Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: a synthesis. Ambio 40(2):231–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-010-0134-0
Article Google Scholar
Reuchamps M, Suiter J (2016) A constitutional turn for deliberative democracy in Europe? In: Reuchamps M, Suiter J (eds) Constitutional deliberative democracy in Europe. ECPR Press, Colchester, pp 1–13
Google Scholar
Revesz RL, Livermore MA (2008) Retaking rationality: how cost-benefit analysis can better protect the environment and our health. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (2012) Introduction to risk theory. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht
Chapter Google Scholar
Rose A, Porter K, Dash N, Bouabid J, Huyck C, Whitehead J, Shaw D, Eguchi R, Taylor C, McLane T, Tobin LT, Ganderton PT, Godschalk D, Kiremidjian AS, Tierney K, West CT (2007) Benefit-cost analysis of FEMA hazard mitigation grants. Nat Haz Rev 8(4):97–111. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2007)8:4(97)
Article Google Scholar
Ross A, Athanassoulis N (2012) Risk and virtue ethics. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 833–856
Chapter Google Scholar
Rougier J (2013) Quantifying hazard losses. In: Rougier J, Hill LJ, Sparks RSJ (eds) Risk and uncertainty assessment for natural hazards. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 19–39
Chapter Google Scholar
Runciman D (2018) How democracy ends. Profile Books, London
Google Scholar
Sanger DE, Lipton E, Sullivan E, Crowley M (2020) Before virus outbreak, a cascade of warnings went unheeded. New York Times, 19 March 2020, updated 22 March 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/19/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-outbreak.html. Accessed 19 June 2023
Saretzki T (1994) Technokratie, Technokratiekritik und das Verschwinden der Gesellschaft: Zur Diskussion um das andere politische Projekt der Moderne. In: Lenk K, Greven MT, Kühler P, Schmitz M (eds) Politikwissenschaft als Kritische Theorie: Festschrift für Kurt Lenk. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 353–386
Google Scholar
Schäfer A (2006) Die demokratische Grenze output-orientierter Legitimation. Integration 29(3):187–200
Google Scholar
Scharpf FW (1997) Economic integration, democracy and the welfare state. J Eur Public Policy 4(1):18–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017697344217
Article Google Scholar
Scheffler S (2004) Doing and allowing. Ethics 114(2):215–239. https://doi.org/10.1086/379355
Article Google Scholar
Schneewind JB (2010) Autonomy, obligation, and virtue: an overview of Kant’s Moral philosophy. In: Schneewind JB (ed) Essays on the history of moral philosophy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 248–276
Google Scholar
Schudson M (2006) The trouble with experts – and why democracies need them. Theor Soc 35(5–6):491–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-006-9012-y
Article Google Scholar
Schumpeter JA (2010) Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge, London
Book Google Scholar
Shearman DJ, Smith JW (2007) The climate change challenge and the failure of democracy. Politics and the environment. Praeger, Santa Barbara
Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette KS (1991) Risk and rationality: philosophical foundations for populist reforms. University of California Press, Berkeley
Book Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette K (2005) Flawed attacks on contemporary human rights: Laudan, Sunstein, and the cost-benefit state. Hum Rights Rev 7(1):92–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-005-1004-1
Article Google Scholar
Shreve CM, Kelman I (2014) Does mitigation save? Reviewing cost-benefit analyses of disaster risk reduction. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 10:213–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.08.004
Article Google Scholar
Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236(4799):280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
Article Google Scholar
Slovic P (2000) The perception of risk. Earthscan risk in society. Taylor & Francis, London
Google Scholar
Smart JJ (1973) An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics. In: Smart JJ, Williams B (eds) Utilitarianism: for and against. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–74
Chapter Google Scholar
Smith A (2002) The theory of moral sentiments. Cambridge texts in the history of philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Spence R, So E (2021) Why do buildings collapse in earthquakes?: Building for safety in seismic areas. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken
Book Google Scholar
Staudenmaier R (2020) World’s top coronavirus experts face fame, scorn amid pandemic. Deutsche Welle, 30 April 2020. https://p.dw.com/p/3bcKi. Accessed 19 June 2023
Stefanovic IL (2003) The contribution of philosophy to hazards assessment and decision making. Nat Haz 28(2–3):229–247. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022965604958
Article Google Scholar
Stewart H (1995) A critique of instrumental reason in economics. Econ Philos 11(1):57–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267100003229
Article Google Scholar
Stoll P-T (2003) Sicherheit als Aufgabe von Staat und Gesellschaft: Verfassungsordnung, Umwelt- und Technikrecht im Umgang mit Unsicherheit und Risiko. Jus Publicum, vol 101. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Google Scholar
Strøm K (2000) Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies. Eur J Polit Res 37(3):261–290. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007064803327
Article Google Scholar
Sun LG (2016) Climate change and the narrative of disaster. In: Peel J, Fisher D (eds) The role of international environmental law in disaster risk reduction. Brill, Leiden, pp 27–48
Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2002a) Probability neglect: emotions, worst cases, and law. Yale Law J 112(1):61–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/1562234
Article Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2002b) Risk and reason: safety, law, and the environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2004a) Lives, life-years, and willingness to pay. Colum Law Rev 104(1):205–252
Article Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2004b) Valuing life: a plea for disaggregation. Duke Law J 54(2):385–446
Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2005a) Cost-benefit analysis and the environment. Ethics 115(2):351–385. https://doi.org/10.1086/426308
Article Google Scholar
Sunstein CR (2005b) Laws of fear: beyond the precautionary principle. The Seeley Lectures, vol 6. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Sunstein CR, Pildes R (1997) Experts, economists, and democrats. In: Sunstein CR (ed) Free markets and social justice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 128–150
Google Scholar
Swyngedouw E (2010) Apocalypse forever? Theory Cult Soc 27(2–3):213–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409358728
Article Google Scholar
Talisse RB (2009) Folk epistemology and the justification of democracy. In: Geenens R, Tinnevelt R (eds) Does truth matter?: Democracy and public space. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 41–54
Chapter Google Scholar
The White House (2020a) Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and members of the coronavirus task force in press conference. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-conference/. Accessed 19 June 2023
The White House (2020b) Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and members of the coronavirus task force in press conference. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-c-oronavirus-task-force-press-briefing/. Accessed 19 June 2023
The White House (2020c) Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and members of the coronavirus task force in press conference. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-9/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Thompson PB (1990) Risk objectivism and risk subjectivism: when are risks real? Risk Issues Health Saf 1(1):3–22
Google Scholar
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
Article Google Scholar
Urbinati N (2014) Democracy disfigured: opinion, truth, and the people. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Book Google Scholar
van Coile R (2016) Probability. In: Burgess A, Alemanno A, Zinn JO (eds) Routledge handbook of risk studies. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 27–38
Google Scholar
van de Poel I, Fahlquist JN (2012) Risk and responsibility. In: Roeser S, Hillerbrand R, Sandin P, Peterson M (eds) Handbook of risk theory: epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 877–907
Chapter Google Scholar
Vibert F (2007) The rise of the unelected: democracy and the new separation of powers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Book Google Scholar
Viscusi WK (1992) Fatal tradeoffs: public and private responsibilities for risk. Oxford University Press, New York
Google Scholar
Viscusi WK (2015) Pricing lives for corporate risk decisions. Vanderbilt Law Rev 68(4):1117–1162. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2015.40
Article Google Scholar
Wachinger G, Renn O, Begg C, Kuhlicke C (2013) The risk perception paradox-implications for governance and communication of natural hazards. Risk Anal 33(6):1049–1065. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x
Article Google Scholar
Waldron J (2012) Democracy. In: Estlund DM (ed) The Oxford handbook of political philosophy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 187–203
Google Scholar
Walker JL (1966) A critique of the elitist theory of democracy. Am Polit Sci Rev 60(2):285–295. https://doi.org/10.2307/1953356
Article Google Scholar
Williams B (1973) A critique of utilitarianism. In: Smart JJ, Williams B (eds) Utilitarianism: for and against. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 75–150
Google Scholar
Woollard F, Howard-Snyder F (2022) Doing vs. allowing harm. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/doing-allowing/. Accessed 19 June 2023
Google Scholar
World Health Organization, Regional Office for the Western Pacific (2020) Calibrating long-term non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19: principles and facilitation tools, Manila. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/332099. Accessed 19 June 2023
Zack N (2011) Ethics for disaster. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Hamburg, Germany
Christina Anikó Simmig

Authors

Christina Anikó Simmig
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Simmig, C.A. (2023). The ‘Better Argument’ in Legitimate Risk Governance. In: Of Risks and Normative Responses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41104-5_5

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41104-5_5
Published: 24 September 2023
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41103-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41104-5
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics