Before amplification: the role of experts in the dynamics of the social attenuation and amplification of risk

References

• Aftenposten. 2003. Fant antibiotika i svenske kyllinger. https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/4BGQE/fant-antibiotika-i-svenske-kyllinger.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, J., G. A. Auðunsson, D. Benford, A. Cockburn, J. P. Cravedi, E. Dogliotti, and C. L. Galli. 2007. “Cross-Contamination of Non-Target Feedingstuffs by Narasin Authorised for Use as a Feed Additive—Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain.” EFSA Journal 5 (10) 552: 1–35.
   Google Scholar
• Bakir, V. 2005. “Greenpeace v. Shell: Media Exploitation and the Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF).” Journal of Risk Research 8 (7–8): 679–691. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870500166898
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. & Pinch, T. J. (1987) The Social Construction of Technological Systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
   Google Scholar
• Boholm, Å., and H. Corvellec. 2011. “A Relational Theory of Risk.” Journal of Risk Research 14 (2): 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2010.515313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busby, J. S., and S. Onggo. 2013. “Managing the Social Amplification of Risk: A Simulation of Interacting Actors.” The Journal of the Operational Research Society 64 (5): 638–653. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2012.80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay, M. K. 2014. “Use of Antibiotics as Feed Additives: A Burning Question.” Frontiers in Microbiology 5: 334. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00334
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dasenaki, M. E., and N. S. Thomaidis. 2023. “Meat Safety: II Residues and Contaminants.” Lawrie’s Meat Science. 8th ed. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, TTechnology and Nutrition 2023: 591-626. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, MA
   Google Scholar
• Dorne, J. L. C. M., and J. Fink-Gremmels. 2013. “Human and Animal Health Risk Assessments of Chemicals in the Food Chain: Comparative Aspects and Future Perspectives.” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 270 (3): 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2012.03.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2019. Ares 6816261, Public consultation on the evaluation of the feed additives regulation—factual summary report, 04/11/2019. https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/animal-feed/feed-additives/evaluation-feed-additives-
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2022. Evaluation of the feed additives regulation. https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/animal-feed/feed-additives/evaluation-feed-additives-regulation_en
   Google Scholar
• Fjaeran, L., and T. Aven. 2019. “Making Visible the Less Visible—How the Use of an Uncertainty-Based Risk Perspective Affects Risk Attenuation and Risk Amplification.” Journal of Risk Research 24 (6): 673–691. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1687579
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fjaeran, L., and T. Aven. 2021. “Creating Conditions for Critical Trust—How an Uncertainty-Based Risk Perspective Relates to Dimensions and Types of Trust.” Safety Science 133: 105008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freudenburg, W. R. 2003. “Institutional Failure and the Organizational Amplification of Risks: The Need for a Closer Look.” In The Social Amplification of Risk, edited by J. X. Kasperson, R. E. Kasperson, N. Pidgeon, & P. Slovic, 102–120. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK
   Google Scholar
• Gjessing, H. 2014. Legeforeningens president: Har ikke spist kylling i hele høst. VG. https://www.vg.no/forbruker/i/3yMyX/legeforeningens-president-har-ikke-spist-kylling-i-hele-hoest
   Google Scholar
• Goble, R. 2021. “Through a Glass Darkly: How Natural Science and Technical Communities Looked at Social Science Advances in Understanding Risk.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 41 (3): 414–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13627
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goble, R., V. Bier, and O. Renn. 2018. “Two Types of Vigilance Are Essential to Effective Hazard Management: Maintaining Both Together is Difficult.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 38 (9): 1795–1801. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goble, R., R. E. Kasperson, and S. Ratick. 2017. “How Can We Best Deal with the Unexpected?.” In Risk Conundrums: Solving Unsolvable Problems, edited by R. E. Kasperson, 47–61. Taylor & Francis. New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Gould, K. P., and L. Fjaeran. 2019. “Drift and the Social Attenuation of Risk.” In Safety Science Research: Evolution, Challenges and New Directions, edited by J. C. Le Coze, 119–133. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Gronningen, D. 2012. “Fremmedstoffprogrammet Restmengder Av Forurensninger Og Legemidler i Animalske Næringsmidler Og Levende Dyr (Inkluderer Import Kontroll) 2012.” Norwegian Veterinary Institute Report Series Rapport 4: 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Healy, S. 2004. “A ‘Post‐Foundational’ Interpretation of Risk: Risk as ‘Performance.” Journal of Risk Research 7 (3): 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366987042000176235
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedenigg, S. 2021. “ In Others We Trust: Finland and Norway–High Trust Societies in the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Partnership Studies 8 (2): 3–3. https://doi.org/10.24926/ijps.v8i2.4340
   Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, S. 1992. “The Social Construction of Risk Objects: Or, How to Pry Open Networks of Risk.” In Short, J.F. & Clarke L. (Eds.) Organizations, Uncertainties, and Risk, . 39–53. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
   Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, S. 2008. “The Social Dimensions of Expert Knowledge about Risk. Published Originally in Spanish as Las Dimensiones Sociales Del Conocimiento Experto Del Riesgo.” In Comunicar Los Riesgos, edited by C. Moreno Castro, 159–170. Madrid: Bilioteca Nueva.
   Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R. E. 1992. “The Social Amplification of Risk: Progress in Developing an Integrative Framework.” In Social Theories of Risk, edited by S. Krimsky & D. Golding, 53–178. Praeger. Westport, CT.
   Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R. E., and J. X. Kasperson. 1996. “The Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 545 (1): 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716296545001010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasperson, J. X., R. E. Kasperson, N. Pidgeon, and P. Slovic. 2003. “The Social Amplification of Risk: Assessing Fifteen Years of Research and Theory.” The Social Amplification of Risk 1: 13–46.
   Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R. E., B. Ram, and S. Ratick. 2017. “How Can We Be Sure That We Are Working on the Right Risks?.” In Risk Conundrums: Solving Unsolvable Problems, edited by R. E. Kasperson, 11–23. Taylor & Francis. New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R. E., O. Renn, P. Slovic, H. S. Brown, J. Emel, R. Goble, J. X. Kasperson, and S. Ratick. 1988. “The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework.” Risk Analysis 8 (2): 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R. E., T. Webler, B. Ram, and J. Sutton. 2022. “The Social Amplification of Risk Framework: New Perspectives.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 42 (7): 1367–1380. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13926
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraus, N., T. Malmfors, and P. Slovic. 1992. “Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks.” Risk Analysis 12 (2): 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb00669.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson, H. J., L. Lin, and R. Goble. 2022. “Vaccines and the Social Amplification of Risk.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 42 (7): 1409–1422. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13942
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J., and J. Hassard. 1999. Actor Network Theory and after. Wiley-Blackwell. Oxford, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Listhaug, O., and B. Aardal. 2011. “Politisk Tillit- Et Mål På Demokratiets Hele Tilstand?.” In Det Politiske Landskap. En Studie Av Stortingsvalget 2009, edited by Aardal, B., 291–304. Oslo: Cappelen Damm AS.
   Google Scholar
• McDougal, T. 2018. Dispute over coccidiostats in poultry. Poultry World. https://www.poultryworld.net/uk/dispute-over-coccidiostats-in-poultry/
   Google Scholar
• Midtvedt, T. 2015. “Bekymringsmelding Om Antibiotika i Kyllingfor.” Tidsskrift for Den Norske Laegeforening: Tidsskrift for Praktisk Medicin, Ny Raekke 135 (8): 742–742. https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.15.0196
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Midtvedt, T. 2014. Dette kan gjøre kyllingen farligere for deg. ABC Nyheter. https://www.abcnyheter.no/livet/2014/10/19/210106/dette-kan-gjore-kyllingen-farligere-for-deg
   Google Scholar
• Murdock, G., J. Petts, and T. Horlick-Jones. 2003. “After Amplification: Rethinking the Role of Media in Risk Communication.” In J. X. Kasperson, R. E. Kasperson, N. Pidgeon, & P. Slovic (Eds.), The Social Amplification of Risk (pp. 156–178). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Nesse, L. L., A. M. Bakke, T. Eggen, K. Hoel, M. Kaldhusdal, E. Ringø, and S. Yazdankhah. 2015. “The Risk of Development of Antimicrobial Resistance with the Use of Coccidiostats in Poultry Diets—Opinion of the Panel on Animal Feed of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety.” Report from the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety.. Q15: (VKM) 2015:30.
   Google Scholar
• NMA, Norwegian Medicines Agency. 2003. Statens legemiddelverk 2003:04.
   Google Scholar
• NORM/NORM-VET. 2003. Usage of Antimicrobial Agents and Occurrence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Norway. Tromsø/Oslo, Norway 2004.
   Google Scholar
• NORM/NORM-VET. 2017. Usage of Antimicrobial Agents and Occurrence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Norway. Tromsø. Tromsø/Oslo, Norway 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA). 2014. Fremmedstoffer i fôr. https://www.mattilsynet.no/dyr_og_dyrehold/for/fremmedstoffer_i_for.5563.
   Google Scholar
• NOU, Norges Offentlige Utredninger. 2023. “Total NOU 2023: 17 Nå Er Det Alvor—Rustet for En Usikker Fremtid.” Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet. Oslo, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2022. Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Norway, Building Trust in Public Institutions. OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Perrow, C. 1984. Normal Accidents. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ
   Google Scholar
• Petts, J., T. Horlick-Jones, G. Murdock, D. Hargreaves, S. McLachlan, and R. Lofstedt. 2001. Social Amplification of Risk: The Media and the Public. HSE Books. Sudbury, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (Eds.). 2003. The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N., W. Poortinga, and J. Walls. 2010. “Scepticism, Reliance and Risk Managing Institutions: Towards a Conceptual Model of ‘Critical Trust.” In Trust in Cooperative Risk Management, edited by M. Siegrist, T. C. Earle, & N. F., 131–156. Routledge. London, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Poumadere, M., and C. Mays. 2003. “The Dynamics of Risk Amplification and Attenuation in Context: A French Case Study.” In The Social Amplification of Risk, edited by N. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson, & P. Slovic, 209–242. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. 2014. “Risk, Social Theories, and Organizations.” In The Oxford Handbook of Sociology, Social Theory, and Organization Studies: Contemporary Currents, 370–392. Oxford University Press. Oxford, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, T. 2006. Forbudt stoff i jærske egg. Aftenbladet. https://www.aftenbladet.no/okonomi/i/dMKkO/forbudt-stoff-i-jrske-egg
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, S. 1988. “Muddling through Metaphors to Maturity: A Commentary on Kasperson Et Al.: The Social Amplification of Risk.” Risk Analysis 8 (2): 201–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01172.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regulation (EC). 2003. “No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on Additives for Use in Animal Nutrition.” Official Journal of the European Union L 268/ (29)
   Google Scholar
• Renn, O. 2011. “The Social Amplification/Attenuation of Risk Framework: Application to Climate Change.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2 (2): 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.99
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rip, A. 1988. “Should Social Amplification of Risk Be Counteracted?” Risk Analysis 8 (2): 193–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01170.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossland, I. E. 2003. “Avviser Gift I Svensk Kylling".NRK 21. https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/avviser-gift-i-svensk-kylling-1.333663.
   Google Scholar
• Rybicki, M. J. 2020. “Coccidiostats in Treating Coccidiosis.” Żywność Nauka Technologia Jakość 27 (4): 125.
   Google Scholar
• Short, J. F. 1992. Organizations, Uncertainties, and Risk. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siegrist, M., and G. Cvetkovich. 2001. “Better Negative than Positive? Evidence of a Bias for Negative Information about Possible Health Dangers.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 21 (1): 199–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.211102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P. 1993. “Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy.” Risk Analysis 13 (6): 675–682. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statens. legemiddelverk 2003. “Terapianbefaling: Medikamentell Behandling Av Fjørfe.” Statens Legemiddelverk Publikasjon 2003: 04.
   Google Scholar
• Sunde, M. 2014. Forsker slår bakteriealarm om norsk kylling: Jeg tar aldri i kyllingen med fingrene. VG. https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/OMLkl/forsker-slaar-bakteriealarm-om-norsk-kylling-jeg-tar-aldri-i-kylling-med-fingrene.
   Google Scholar
• Totland, G. 2006. Forbudt stoff i jærske egg. Aftenbladet. https://www.aftenbladet.no/okonomi/i/dMKkO/forbudt-stoff-i-jrske-egg.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, B. A., and N. F. Pidgeon. 1997. Man-Made Disasters. Butterworth-Heinemann. Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• White, M. P., and J. R. Eiser. 2006. “Marginal Trust in Risk Managers: Building and Losing Trust following Decisions under Uncertainty.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 26 (5): 1187–1203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00807.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, M. P., and R. Eiser. 2010. “A Social Judgments Analysis of Trust: People as Intuitive Detection Theorists.” In Trust in Risk Management: Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind, edited by T. C. Earle, M. Siegrist, & H. Gutscher, 95–116. Earthscan. London, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, S. 2008. “Rethinking the Nature of Disaster: From Failed Instruments of Learning to a Post-Social Understanding.” Social Forces 87 (2): 1115–1138. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 1996. “May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View of the Expert-Lay Knowledge Divide.” In Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, 40–44. SAGE Books. London, UK.
   Google Scholar