Expert Judgment in Risk Analysis and Management: Process, Context, and Pitfalls

133Citations
Citations of this article
78Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The regulation and management of hazardous industrial activities increasingly rely on formal expert judgment processes to provide wisdom in areas of science and technology where traditional “good science” is, in practice, unable to supply unambiguous “facts.” Expert judgment has always played a significant, if often unrecognized, role in analysis; however, recent trends are to make it formal, explicit, and documented so it can be identified and reviewed by others. We propose four categories of expert judgment and present three case studies which illustrate some of the pitfalls commonly encountered in its use. We conclude that there will be an expanding policy role for formal expert judgment and that the openness, transparency, and documentation that it requires have implications for enhanced public involvement in scientific and technical affairs. Copyright © 1992, Wiley Blackwell. All rights reserved

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Otway, H., & von Winterfeldt, D. (1992). Expert Judgment in Risk Analysis and Management: Process, Context, and Pitfalls. Risk Analysis, 12(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01310.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free