Citation:

Hofstetter**, P, J C. Bare*, J. K. Hammit, P A. Murphy, AND G Rice. TOOLS FOR COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES: COMPETING OR COMPLEMENTARY PERSPECTIVES? E. Anderson (ed.), RISK ANALYSIS. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA, 22(5):833-851, (2002).

Description:

A third generation of environmental policymaking and risk management will increasingly impose environmental measures, which may give rise to analyzing countervailing risks. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of these risks associated with the decision alternatives at hand will enable decision makers to be aware of all countervailing risks and help prioritizing those alternatives that efficiently reduce both target and countervailing risks. Starting with the metaphor of a stone that is thrown in a pond that causes ripples we identify 10 types of ripples that symbolize risks that deserve closer examination: direct, upstream, downstream, accidental and occupational risks, risks due to offsetting behavior, change in disposable income, macro-economic changes, depletion of natural resources and risks to the man-made environment. Tools to analyze these risks developed independently and recently they have been applied to overlapping fields of applications. This suggests either that the time for a unified framework for comparative analysis is ripe or that a better understanding of the appropriate field of application for single tools is overdue. The overarching goals of this paper are to create a better foundation for understanding of the nature and coverage of available tools and to identify the remaining gaps. Evaluations revealed that none of these approaches alone are designed to deal with all of the 10 types of risk. Further, we found that these tools differ with respect to important characteristics of a decision, namely, the assessment dimensions, the object and decision level, the implied decision principle and the coverage of distributional aspects.

Record Details: