• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective
【24h】

Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective

机译：为什么国家对环境健康风险的监管不同？理论视角

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Why do countries regulate, or prefer to regulate, environmental health risks such as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and endocrine disruptors differently? A wide variety of theories, models, and frameworks can be used to help answer this question, though the resulting answer will strongly depend on the theoretical perspective that is applied. In this theoretical review, we will explore eight conceptual frameworks, from different areas of science, which will offer eight different potential explanations as to why international differences occur in environmental health risk management. We are particularly interested in frameworks that could shed light on the role of scientific expertise within risk management processes. The frameworks included in this review are the Risk Assessment Paradigm, research into the roles of experts as policy advisors, the Psychometric Paradigm, the Cultural Theory of Risk, participatory approaches to risk assessment and risk management, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, and Hofstede's Model of National Cultures. We drew from our knowledge and experiences regarding a diverse set of academic disciplines to pragmatically assemble a multidisciplinary set of frameworks. From the ideas and concepts offered by the eight frameworks, we derive pertinent questions to be used in further empirical work and we present an overarching framework to depict the various links that could be drawn between the frameworks.
机译：为什么国家/地区以不同的方式监管或更愿意监管诸如射频电磁场和内分泌干扰物之类的环境健康风险？可以使用各种各样的理论，模型和框架来回答这个问题，尽管最终的答案将在很大程度上取决于所应用的理论观点。在本理论综述中，我们将探讨来自不同科学领域的八个概念框架，这些框架将就环境健康风险管理中国际差异的原因提供八种不同的潜在解释。我们对可能揭示科学专业知识在风险管理流程中的作用的框架特别感兴趣。本评估中包括的框架包括：风险评估范式，对专家作为政策顾问的作用的研究，心理计量范式，风险文化理论，风险评估和风险管理的参与式方法，倡导联盟框架，风险框架和霍夫斯泰德的民族文化模型。我们从关于各种学科的知识和经验中汲取了经验，以务实的方式建立了一套多学科的框架。从八个框架提供的思想和概念中，我们得出了将在进一步的实证研究中使用的相关问题，并且我们提出了一个总体框架，以描绘框架之间可能形成的各种联系。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Risk analysis》 |2019年第2期|439-461|共23页
  • 作者

    Clahsen Sander C. S.; van Kamp Irene; Hakkert Betty C.; Vermeire Theo G.; Piersma Aldert H.; Lebret Erik;

  • 作者单位

    Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Ctr Sustainabil Environm & Hlth, POB 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, Netherlands|Univ Utrecht, Inst Risk Assessment Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands;

    Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Ctr Sustainabil Environm & Hlth, POB 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, Netherlands;

    Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Ctr Safety Subst & Prod, Bilthoven, Netherlands;

    Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Ctr Safety Subst & Prod, Bilthoven, Netherlands;

    Univ Utrecht, Inst Risk Assessment Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands|Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Ctr Hlth Protect, Bilthoven, Netherlands;

    Univ Utrecht, Inst Risk Assessment Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands|Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, Bilthoven, Netherlands;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    International differences in environmental health risk management; review of conceptual frameworks; science-policy interface;

    机译：环境卫生风险管理方面的国际差异;概念框架审查;科学政策互动;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号