Abstract
Valuing present citizen's values regarding the risks they face is an important aspect of risk assessment and risk acceptability. Conferences like VALDOR are held for this reason. Governments like Sweden have national referendums on various risk-prone enterprises. The results of these referendums can determine the future of these programs. In the United States, when guidelines are set for determining acceptable levels of risk, the relevant federal agencies are often required to provide a comment period regarding proposed guidelines in order to ascertain the judgments, including the weights place on certain values, of individual members of society as well as stakeholder groups. After the comment period ends, the agency decides on the acceptable level of risk, taking into account the comments from present citizens. Do we also have a duty to value the not-yet-existing values of future citizens, especially if the risks created by the activities of present citizens extend into the future to citizens not yet living? If so, are there any circumstances which entitle us to de-value those not-yet-existing values. In this paper, I ground my discussion of the question of valuing future citizens' values in one of the areas of focus of the VALDOR conference: nuclear waste management
More>>
Fleming, Patricia
[1]
- Creighton Univ., Omaha (United States). College of Arts and Sciences/Philosophy
Citation Formats
Fleming, Patricia.
Valuing future citizens' values regarding risk.
Sweden: N. p.,
2006.
Web.
Fleming, Patricia.
Valuing future citizens' values regarding risk.
Sweden.
Fleming, Patricia.
2006.
"Valuing future citizens' values regarding risk."
Sweden.
@misc{etde_20789773,
title = {Valuing future citizens' values regarding risk}
author = {Fleming, Patricia}
abstractNote = {Valuing present citizen's values regarding the risks they face is an important aspect of risk assessment and risk acceptability. Conferences like VALDOR are held for this reason. Governments like Sweden have national referendums on various risk-prone enterprises. The results of these referendums can determine the future of these programs. In the United States, when guidelines are set for determining acceptable levels of risk, the relevant federal agencies are often required to provide a comment period regarding proposed guidelines in order to ascertain the judgments, including the weights place on certain values, of individual members of society as well as stakeholder groups. After the comment period ends, the agency decides on the acceptable level of risk, taking into account the comments from present citizens. Do we also have a duty to value the not-yet-existing values of future citizens, especially if the risks created by the activities of present citizens extend into the future to citizens not yet living? If so, are there any circumstances which entitle us to de-value those not-yet-existing values. In this paper, I ground my discussion of the question of valuing future citizens' values in one of the areas of focus of the VALDOR conference: nuclear waste management and specifically the question facing the United States' program regarding an acceptable dose standard associated with the release of radioactivity into the biosphere from an underground repository. The underlying conference theme to which this discussion may be attached is community environmental justice as it applies to future citizens. I focus on the role that uncertainty plays is providing justice between present and future citizens.}
place = {Sweden}
year = {2006}
month = {Sep}
}
title = {Valuing future citizens' values regarding risk}
author = {Fleming, Patricia}
abstractNote = {Valuing present citizen's values regarding the risks they face is an important aspect of risk assessment and risk acceptability. Conferences like VALDOR are held for this reason. Governments like Sweden have national referendums on various risk-prone enterprises. The results of these referendums can determine the future of these programs. In the United States, when guidelines are set for determining acceptable levels of risk, the relevant federal agencies are often required to provide a comment period regarding proposed guidelines in order to ascertain the judgments, including the weights place on certain values, of individual members of society as well as stakeholder groups. After the comment period ends, the agency decides on the acceptable level of risk, taking into account the comments from present citizens. Do we also have a duty to value the not-yet-existing values of future citizens, especially if the risks created by the activities of present citizens extend into the future to citizens not yet living? If so, are there any circumstances which entitle us to de-value those not-yet-existing values. In this paper, I ground my discussion of the question of valuing future citizens' values in one of the areas of focus of the VALDOR conference: nuclear waste management and specifically the question facing the United States' program regarding an acceptable dose standard associated with the release of radioactivity into the biosphere from an underground repository. The underlying conference theme to which this discussion may be attached is community environmental justice as it applies to future citizens. I focus on the role that uncertainty plays is providing justice between present and future citizens.}
place = {Sweden}
year = {2006}
month = {Sep}
}