SRA Logo (print)


Society For Risk Analysis Annual Meeting 2008

Risk Analysis: the Science and the Art

Session Schedule & Abstracts


* Disclaimer: All presentations represent the views of the authors, and not the organizations that support their research. Please apply the standard disclaimer that any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations in abstracts, posters, and presentations at the meeting are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other organization or agency. Meeting attendees and authors should be aware that this disclaimer is intended to apply to all abstracts contained in this document. Authors who wish to emphasize this disclaimer should do so in their presentation or poster. In an effort to make the abstracts as concise as possible and easy for meeting participants to read, the abstracts have been formatted such that they exclude references to papers, affiliations, and/or funding sources. Authors who wish to provide attendees with this information should do so in their presentation or poster.

Common abbreviations

Plenary Session Wednesday

8:30-10:00 AM

Eliminating Anti-Regulatory Biases. Revesz R.*; New York University   richard.revesz@nyu.edu

Abstract: The new Administration will face a number of challenges as it implements its policies with respect to the use of cost-benefit analysis in the administrative state: 1. how to engage progressive groups in methodological discussions about how benefits and costs should be evaluated. 2. how to eliminate anti-regulatory biases that have emerged over the past decades as a result of the disproportionate impact in methodological debates of anti-regulatory academics and interest groups representing polluters. 3. how to use cost-benefit analysis as an affirmative prompt for regulations that would have favorable cost-benefit ratios. 4. how to maningfully assess the distributional consequences of individual policies and how to correct aggregate distributional imbalances.



Regulation and the new Administration. Katzen S*; University of Michigan Law School   

Abstract: Some modest suggestions for the new Administration with the objective of depoliticizing the regulatory process, using analytical tools (including risk assessments and cost benefit analyses) productively, and finding common ground on regulatory review.



Enhancing Regulatory Oversight. Graham JD*; Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs   grahamjd@indiana.edu

Abstract: White House oversight of the federal regulatory process can be improved as follows: (1) ensure the poor are treated fairly by regulators, (2) seek weights on non-quantified benefit and costs, (3) seek ex post validation of risk, benefit and cost estimates; (4) commission the Institute of Medicine to prepare periodic blueprints of lifesaving opportunities; (5) ask Congress to codify authority for OMB and citizens to issue "prompt" letters; (6) ask Congress to codify "default" principles risk analysis and benefit-cost-analysis; (7) ask Congress to authorize "risk trading"; (8) implement sustained program of U.S.-E.U. regulatory cooperation. With these reforms, future administrations can produce more protective and cost-effective federal regulations than are now being issued.





[back to schedule]