MCA en MKBA: structureren of sturen? Een verkenning van beslissingsondersteunende instrumenten voor Nuchter omgaan met Risico's
2006
Societal cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and multi-criteria analysis (MCA)
can be useful in deliberations on environmental health risks, but they
are no 'cure all'. Their usefulness is found more in the capacity they
have to produce complex and multi-facetted information. This is relevant
in the context of 'Dealing sensibly with risks', the Dutch government's
new risk policy. One of the key issues in this policy is contained in
the question: do societal costs and benefits of an activity outweigh the
risks and dangers associated with that activity? CBA and MCA can
function as a supplement to the 'Appraisal Framework Health and
Environment'. For the moment, the steering capacity of CBA and MCA in
deliberations on environmental health risks is limited. This is because
of the lack of standardization and unity in methods and techniques;
furthermore, outcomes vary considerably. When complexity and uncertainty
are very high, the quality of the deliberation process and the
participation of parties concerned are more important, while the choice
between MCA and CBA is less important. These are then the main results
of a study to explore advantages and disadvantages of CBA and MCA (along
with their applications) for decision support. The study was carried out
by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) on
commission of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment (VROM). The report also provides some recommendations for
further development of the Appraisal Framework on Health and Environment
and lends a provisional 'helping hand' to the deliberations in the
context of 'Dealing sensibly with risks'.
Keywords:
- Correction
- Source
- Cite
- Save
- Machine Reading By IdeaReader
0
References
0
Citations
NaN
KQI