摘要
自20世纪70年代经典风险分析方法出现以来,风险分析领域长期存在着“客观性立场”和“建构性立场”的分野。前者认为风险是客观、可测量的实在,希望使用量化方法以及专家知识,客观地描述并测量风险;后者针锋相对地指出风险是社会建构的产物,批评量化方法,并建议在风险分析中纳入更多的定性方法与公众参与。只有以审度立场反思两派的争论,整合两派的合理观点,才能使风险分析方法更好地服务于风险社会的技术与工程实践。
Since the emergence of classic risk analysis methods in the 1970s, there has been a distinction between "objective stance" and "constructive stance" in the field of risk analysis for a long time. The former believes that risk is an objective and measurable reality, and hopes to use quantitative methods and expert knowledge to describe and measure risk objectively;the latter points out that risk is a product of social construction, criticizes quantitative methods, and suggests that more qualitative methods and public participation should be included in risk analysis. Only by reflecting on the debates of the two standpoints and integrating the reasonable viewpoints of them can the risk analysis method better serve the technology and engineering practice in the risk society.
作者
李尉博
Li Weibo(School of Philosophy,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)
出处
《科技管理研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2023年第3期234-239,共6页
Science and Technology Management Research
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目“现代技术治理理论问题研究”(21&ZD064)。
关键词
风险分析
风险实在论
风险建构论
量化方法
公众参与
risk analysis
risk realism
risk constructivism
quantitative methods
public engagement
