controllability, catastrophic potential, and equity into the risk-benefit equation. The impacts of public perceptions of risk cannot be lessened without drastic, politically unacceptable changes in the structure of our society. Thus, we must learn to treat perceptions as legitimate. We must attempt to understand them and to incorporate public concerns and wisdom into decision making, along with the wisdom gleaned from scientific assessments of risk.

REFERENCES

Hall, S. 1987. One potato patch that is making genetic history. Smithsonian 18(5):125-136.

Kasperson, R. E., O. Renn, P. Slovic, H. S. Brown, J. Emel, R. Goble, J. X. Kasperson, and S. Ratick. 1988. The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis 8:177-187.

Lichentenstein, S., P. Slovic, B. Fischoff, M. Layman, and B. Combs. 1978. Judged frequency of lethal events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 4:551-578.

Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285.

Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1973. Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology 5:207-232.

Weinberg, A. M. 1976. The maturity and future of nuclear energy. American Scientist 64:16-21.

Zilinskas, R. A., and B. K. Zimmerman, eds. 1986. The Gene-Splicing Wars: Reflections on the Recombinant DNA Controversy New York: MacMillan.

Zinder, N. D. 1986. A personal view of the media's role in the recombinant DNA war. In The Gene-Splicing Wars: Reflections on the Recombinant DNA Controversy R. A. Zilinskas and B. K. Zimmerman, eds. New York: MacMillan.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement