Theorizing and Generalizing about Risk Assessment and Regulation through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6090504
AutoresBrendon Swedlow (0000-0003-2117-9639, Northern Illinois University), Denise Kall (Duke University), Zheng Zhou (0009-0004-1929-101X), James K Hammitt (0000-0003-4797-8041, Center for Policy Analysis), Jonathan B Wiener (0000-0002-8852-3177, Duke University)
Año2009
Volumen31
Número2
Páginas236-269
Fecha de publicación2009-04-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaLaw & Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0265-8240 • E-ISSN: 1467-9930
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1467-9930.2009.00296.x
OpenAlexW2152614419
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas14
Referencias citadas47

This article provides a framework and offers strategies for theorizing and generalizing about risk assessment and regulation developed in the context of an on‐going comparative study of regulatory behavior. Construction of a universe of nearly 3,000 risks and study of a random sample of 100 of these risks allowed us to estimate relative U.S. and European regulatory precaution over a thirty‐five‐year period. Comparative nested analysis of cases selected from this universe of ecological, health, safety, and other risks or its eighteen categories or ninety‐two subcategories of risk sources or causes will allow theory‐testing and ‐building and many further descriptive and causal comparative generalizations

Business · Context (archaeology · Geography · Risk analysis (engineering · Sample (material · Psychology · Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research · Regulation and Compliance Studies · Risk Perception and Management