Respect for lay perceptions of risk in the hormesis case

Abstract

In this essay for this issue, David Ropeik empahasizes that it is important to respect the risk perceptions of laypeople. The present commentary examines Ropeik's suggestion in more detail. First, it clarifies that the notion of 'respect' for lat risk perceptions is ambiguous. For example, one could adopt a fairly technocratic perspective (in which policy decisions are based almost exclusively on the risk perceptions of technical experts) while still claiming to respect laypeople. The second section of the commentary rejects such an appraoch; it provides a four-part argument in favor of giving significant weight to the risk perceptions of the public when making policy decisions. It concludes by arguing that these suggestions could be implemented in the hormesis case by adopting the sorts of analytic-deliberative approaches advocated by the National Research Council report Understanding Risk.