GOVERNMENT RISK REGULATION

This article argues that risk assessment, supposedly the scientific co mponent of risk regulation (as opposed to risk management, the policy component), cannot be very scientific because too little is known. Wit hout firm scientific knowledge, risk assessment must rely on conventio ns promulgated by bureaucrats or an the professional judgments of scie ntific experts; such conventions and judgments reflect not only scient ific knowledge but also policy judgments and cultural values. The inad equacy of scientific knowledge, coupled with the lack of public trust in government and in experts, suggests that risk regulators should be concerned not only with creating institutional arrangements likely to foster trust but also with creating mechanisms for providing concerned individuals with credible reassurance. The article concludes by discu ssing divergences between public perceptions and expert perceptions of risks, and the weights that a democratic society should give to each in assessing and managing risks.