東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Regulating safety: The social and cu...

Aldo, Paul Gene.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices./
作者:	Aldo, Paul Gene.
面頁冊數:	168 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 63-12, Section: A, page: 4478.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International63-12A.
標題:	Sociology, General. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3073582
ISBN:	0493934952

Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices.
Aldo, Paul Gene.

Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices. - 168 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 63-12, Section: A, page: 4478.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Virginia, 2003.

The principal result of this research is a highly general theoretical framework that explains the logic underlying the application of safety regulation to activities that can result in accidental death. It differs from previous work through its higher level of generality and distinctly social and cultural approach. Rather than starting with a probabilistic risk assessment model that defines dangerousness in terms of the likelihood of accident occurrence, the current research seeks to understand hazards, and the regulations developed to protect against them, in terms of the meaning they have for the exposed populations. There are four variables used to do this: (1) exposure, involving the total number of people exposed to a hazard as well as the social structure of their exposure, (2) cost, expressed as total accident cost, provider liability costs and the cost of public avoidance, (3) lethality, which considers both the deadliness and catastrophic potential of an activity, and (4) evitability, which expresses a collective belief in the possibility of preventing activity related accidents. When taken together these variables appear to explain and predict the amount of restrictiveness regulatory safety practices will have, and whether the responsibility for them will be publicly or privately held. Of significance is the finding that the presumed dangerousness of an activity is not about the likelihood of getting into an accident, even though it is typically treated that way in other investigations. It is, instead, about the likely outcome of an accident if one were to occur. And this appears to be determined by accident lethality and evitability, not by probability of occurrence. Additionally, public responsibility for the administration of safety regulation does not appear to be determined by the danger involved, however measured, but instead, by the size and structure of participant exposure and accident cost. These assertions are demonstrated through the construction and application of nine propositional statements and the detailed analysis of safety regulation for airline transportation, nuclear power (where the framework predicts the demise of that industry), and responses to terrorism in the U.S. as a result of the events of September 11.

ISBN: 0493934952Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017541
Sociology, General.

Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices.
LDR:03201nmm 2200289 4500 001 1865777
005 20041220102515.5
008 130614s2003 eng d
020 $a 0493934952
035 $a (UnM)AAI3073582
035 $a AAI3073582
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Aldo, Paul Gene. $3 1953203
245 1 0 $a Regulating safety: The social and cultural logic underlying the adoption of protective practices.
300 $a 168 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 63-12, Section: A, page: 4478.
500 $a Adviser: Steven Nock.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Virginia, 2003.
520 $a The principal result of this research is a highly general theoretical framework that explains the logic underlying the application of safety regulation to activities that can result in accidental death. It differs from previous work through its higher level of generality and distinctly social and cultural approach. Rather than starting with a probabilistic risk assessment model that defines dangerousness in terms of the likelihood of accident occurrence, the current research seeks to understand hazards, and the regulations developed to protect against them, in terms of the meaning they have for the exposed populations. There are four variables used to do this: (1) exposure, involving the total number of people exposed to a hazard as well as the social structure of their exposure, (2) cost, expressed as total accident cost, provider liability costs and the cost of public avoidance, (3) lethality, which considers both the deadliness and catastrophic potential of an activity, and (4) evitability, which expresses a collective belief in the possibility of preventing activity related accidents. When taken together these variables appear to explain and predict the amount of restrictiveness regulatory safety practices will have, and whether the responsibility for them will be publicly or privately held. Of significance is the finding that the presumed dangerousness of an activity is not about the likelihood of getting into an accident, even though it is typically treated that way in other investigations. It is, instead, about the likely outcome of an accident if one were to occur. And this appears to be determined by accident lethality and evitability, not by probability of occurrence. Additionally, public responsibility for the administration of safety regulation does not appear to be determined by the danger involved, however measured, but instead, by the size and structure of participant exposure and accident cost. These assertions are demonstrated through the construction and application of nine propositional statements and the detailed analysis of safety regulation for airline transportation, nuclear power (where the framework predicts the demise of that industry), and responses to terrorism in the U.S. as a result of the events of September 11.
590 $a School code: 0246.
650 4 $a Sociology, General. $3 1017541
650 4 $a Sociology, Public and Social Welfare. $3 1017909
650 4 $a Sociology, Theory and Methods. $3 626625
690 $a 0626
690 $a 0630
690 $a 0344
710 2 0 $a University of Virginia. $3 645578
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 63-12A.
790 1 0 $a Nock, Steven, $e advisor
790 $a 0246
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2003
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3073582