Risk Versus Risk

Stories appear in the newspaper nearly every day: a drug hailed as a breakthrough treatment turns out to cause harmful side effects; controls implemented to reduce air pollution are shown to generate hazardous solid waste; bans on dangerous chemicals result in the introduction of even more risky substitutes. Could our efforts to protect our health and the environment actually be making things worse? This suspicion has long troubled both advocates and critics of risk-reduction efforts, but the problem has never received focused scrutiny. In "Risk Versus Risk", John D. Graham, Jonathan Baert Wiener and their colleagues at the Harvard Centre for Risk Analysis marshal a set of case studies which demonstrate that all too often our nation's campaign to reduce risks to our health and the environment is at war with itself, steadily creating new risks. At the heart of this volume is a series of nine case studies illustrating the complexities of risk tradeoffs, ranging from personal medical choices to toxic substances to prevention of global crises. In each case, authors with specific expertise in the field dissect the multidimensional risk consequences of choices facing decisionmakers.
Some of these cases reveal utter folly in risk-reduction efforts; others show decisionmakers recognizing and dealing with risk tradeoffs. "Risk Versus Risk" offers not just a critique of counterproductive risk-reduction efforts, but a method of analysis that is designed to illuminate and help resolve risk tradeoffs. The book concludes by suggesting constructive reforms in government institutions, medical care, and risk decisionmaking to help solve the conundrum of risk tradeoffs.