Sự không chắc chắn và giá trị: Trường hợp đánh giá tác động môi trường

Albæk, E. (1995). Between knowledge and power: Utilization of social science in public policy making.Policy Sciences 28:79–100 Asian Development Bank. (1993). Summary environmental impact assessment: Liaoning expressway, (Tieling-Siping Section) Liaoning province, People’s Republic of China. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Boehmer-Christiansen, S. (1994). Global climate protection policy: The limits of scientific advice, part 1.Global Environmental Change 4 2:140–59. Campbell, D. (1985). Uncertainty as symbolic action in disputes among experts.Social Studies of Science 15:429–53 Canter, L.W. (1983).Environmental impact assessment: Current status and future directions. New York: McGraw Hill. Clark, B.D., Bisset, R. & Wathern, P. (1980).Environmental impact assessment. London: Mansell. Culhane, P.J. (1987). The precision and accuracy of US environmental impact statements.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 8, 3:217–38. Davies, G.S. and Muller, F.G. (1983). A handbook on environmental impact assessment for use in developing countries, Nairobi, Kenya. Report submitted to United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office. (1988). Manual on public involvement in environmental assessment, Hull, Quebec, Canada. Fogelman, V. (1993). Toward a stronger national policy on environment.Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 8, 2:79–84. Freudenburg, W.R. (1992). Heuristics, biases, and the not-so-general public: Expertise and errorr in the assessments of risks. In: S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.)Social theories of risk. London, Praeger. Friesema, H.P. (1982). The scientific content of environmental impact statements: Workshop conclusions. In: L.K. Caldwell, R.V. Bartlett, D.E. Parker & D.L. Keys (Eds.)A study to improve the scientific content and methodology of environmental impact analysis. Bloomington, IN: Bloomington Advanced Studies in Science, Technology and Public Affairs, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University. Funtowicz, S.O. & Ravetz, J.R. (1992). Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science. In: Krimsky, S. & Golding, D. (Eds.)Social theories of risk. London: Praeger. Gariepy, M. and Henault, F. (1994). Environmental assessment and organizational culture: The case of two major developers: Hydro-Quebec and the Ministry of Transport. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Association of Impact Assessment, 14–18 June 1994, Quebec City, Canada. Goodland, R. & Edmundson, V. (Eds.) (1994). Environmental assessment and development. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Gray, J.A. and Gray, P.J. (1977). The Berger report: Its impact on northern pipelines and decisionmaking in northern development.Canadian Public Policy 3, 4:509–14. Hobbs, B.F. (1985). Choosing how to chose: Comparing amalgamation methods for environmental impact assessment.Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 5:301–19. Jain, R. et al. (1993).Environmental assessment. New York: McGraw Hill. Jasanoff, S. (1987). Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science.Social Studies of Science, 17 2:195–230. Jasanoff, S. (1990).The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Lasswell, H. (1971).A pre-view of policy sciences. New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company. Lindblom, C.E. (1980).The policy-making process. Englewood Hills, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Litfin, K.T. (1994).Ozone discourses: Science and politics in global environmental cooperation. New York: Columbia University Press. Morgan, M.G., & Henrion, M. (1992).Uncertainty: A guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press. Munn, R.E. (1979).Environmental impact analysis: Principles and procedures, 2d ed. SCOPE REPORT No. 5. UK: Wiley. Cited in Wathern, P., (Ed.) (1995).Environmental impact assessment: Theory and practice. London, UK: Routledge. Ortolano, L. & Sheperd, A. (1995). Environmental impact assessment. In: F. Vanclay & D.A. Bronstein Eds.Environmental and social impact assessment. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Roberts, R. (1995). Public involvement: From consultation to participation. In: F. Vanclay & D.A. Bronstein (Eds.)Environmental and social impact assessment. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Simon, H.A. (1957).Models of man. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Simon, H.A. (1983).Reason in human affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Stonehouse, J.M. & Mumford, J.D. (1995). Science, risk analysis and environmental policy decisions.Environment and trade. Vol. 5, Switzerland: UNEP Environment and Trade Series. Susskind, L.E. (1983). The uses of negotiation and mediation in environmental impact assessment. In: F.A. Rossini & A.L. Porter (Eds.)Integrated impact assessment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Thompson, P.B. (1986). Uncertainty arguments in environmental issues.Environmental Ethics, 8 1:59–75. Tu, S.L. (1993). Environmental impact assessment implementation in Taiwan and Thailand—A comparative organizational examination of state-owned power companies. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Weinberg, A. (1972). Science and trans-science.Minerva, 10:209. Wildavsky, A. (1979).Speaking truth to power. Boston: Little, Brown. Wondolleck, J. (1985). The importance of process in resolving environmental disputes.Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 5:341–56. Wynne, B. (1982). Rationality and ritual: The windscale inquiry and nuclear decision in Britain. Monograph no. 3, British Society for the History of Science, Chalfont St. Giles, UK. Wynne, B. (1989). Frameworks of rationality in risk management: Towards the testing of naive sociology. In: J. Brown (Ed.)Environmental threats. London: Belhaven. Zehr, S.C. (1990). Acid rain as a social, political and scientific controversy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.