Die Modernisierung der Demokratie im Zeichen der Umweltproblematik

Zilleßen, Horst

doi:10.1007/978-3-322-87766-6_2

Cited by 26 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Zilleßen (1993) sieht fehlende Akzeptanz als Ergebnis veränderter subjektiver Voraussetzungen an: der Zunahme des allgemeinen Bildungsniveaus, die bereits beschrieben wurde, und der Steigerung der Bereitschaft, sich mit konventionellen und unkonventionellen Mitteln zu beteiligen (vgl. Zilleßen (1993) sieht fehlende Akzeptanz als Ergebnis veränderter subjektiver Voraussetzungen an: der Zunahme des allgemeinen Bildungsniveaus, die bereits beschrieben wurde, und der Steigerung der Bereitschaft, sich mit konventionellen und unkonventionellen Mitteln zu beteiligen (vgl.…”

Section: Beteiligungunclassified

Akzeptanz durch inputorientierte Organisationskommunikation

Krebber¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Reihe "Organisationskommunikation. Studien zu Public Relations/Öff entlichkeitsarbeit und Kommunikationsmanagement" zielt darauf, wesentliche Beiträge zur Forschung über Prozesse und Strukturen der Kommunikation von und in Organisationen in ihrem gesellschaft lichen Kontext zu leisten. Damit kommen vor allem Arbeiten zum Tätigkeits-und Berufsfeld Public Relations/Öff entlichkeitsarbeit und Kommunikationsmanagement von Organisationen (Unternehmen, politische Organisationen, Verbände, Vereine, Non-Profi t-Organisationen, etc.), aber auch zur Werbung oder Propaganda in Betracht. Nicht nur kommunikationswissenschaft liche Arbeiten, sondern auch Beiträge aus angrenzenden Sozialwissenschaft en (Soziologie, Politikwissenschaft , Psychologie), der Wirtschaft swissenschaft en oder anderen relevanten Disziplinen zu diesem Th emenbereich sind erwünscht. Durch Praxisbezüge der Arbeiten sollen Anstöße für den Professionalisierungsprozess der Kommunikationsbranche gegeben werden.

show abstract

Section: Beteiligungunclassified

Akzeptanz durch inputorientierte Organisationskommunikation

Krebber¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The problem of ultimate justification: In modern pluralistic societies it is increasingly difficult for individuals and groups of society to draw up or recognise collectively binding principles that are perceived by all equally as justifiable and as selfobliging (Hartwich and Wewer, 1991;Zilleßen, 1993). The variety of lifestyle options and subjectification of meaning (individualisation) are accompanying features of modernisation.…”

Section: Ethical Foundations Of Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Ethical Appraisal of Hormesis: Towards a Rational Discourse on the Acceptability of Risks and Benefits

Renn¹

2008

American J. of Pharmacology and Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is ethically mandated that potential beneficial aspects of low exposure to potentially hazardous material are incorporated in the risk-benefit balancing procedure. The potential harm done by pollutants does not justify the invocation of a categorical principle. Minimisation of risk is not required if health benefits are also at stake. Society needs to find an informed consent on the threshold of risk below compensation of goods is legitimate and morally justified. Such a threshold can be defined context-specific but any human action associated with potential health impacts makes such an acceptability judgment-implicitly or explicitly. Incorporating hormesis into risk management forces regulators to make such thresholds explicit. Once as risk is below this threshold all positive and negative impacts are subject to a relative balancing towards reaching a final judgment on acceptability and necessary risk management options. This balancing risk cannot be reduced to body counts: equity issues, context specific circumstances (voluntary or involuntary exposure, for example), avoidance of risks, the nature of vulnerable groups and many other factors need to be taken into account. Such a complex weighing exercise is best performed by an analytic-deliberative process by which the best available knowledge of impacts (including their uncertain ties) is fed into a deliberating body of individuals representing all sides of the debate. Organizing and structuring an analytic-deliberative discourse for assigning painful trade-offs goes beyond the good intention to have all relevant stakeholders involved in decision making.. Discursive processes need a structure that assures the integration of technical expertise, regulatory requirements, and public values. These different inputs should be combined in such a fashion that they contribute to the deliberation process the type of expertise and knowledge that can claim legitimacy within a rational decision making procedure.

show abstract

“…The problem of ultimate justification In modern pluralistic societies, it is increasingly difficult for individuals and groups of society to draw up or recognize collectively binding principles that are perceived by all equally as justifiable and as self obliging. 29,30 The variety of lifestyle options and subjectification of meaning (individualization) are accompanying features of modernization. With increasing technical and organizational means of shaping the future, the range of behavior options available to people also expands.…”

Section: Ethical Foundations Of Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

An ethical appraisal of hormesis: toward a rational discourse on the acceptability of risks and benefits

Renn¹

2008

Hum Exp Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hormesis has been defined as a dose-response relationship in which there is a stimulatory response at low doses but an inhibiting response at high doses, resulting in a U- or inverted U-shaped dose response. Until now, regulatory agencies have been reluctant to address this new insight or adjusted their routines for regulating such substances. Should regulators change their principles of decision making and standard setting in the light of the new insights from hormesis research? To answer this question, it is essential to review the ethical implications of hormesis in risk assessment and management. What kind of values should goven the regulation of substances and radiation that may cause positive and negative impacts at the same time (depending on dose and individual variability)? This article tries to address this problem. It deals with the basic ethical principles and foundations of risk management and introduces the essentials of ethics and the application of ethical principles to judging the acceptability of risks to humans and the environment. It will also discuss the merits of an analytic deliberative approach to evaluating complex risks and address the application of this discursive methods to risk management taking into account the hormesis challenge.

show abstract

Die Modernisierung der Demokratie im Zeichen der Umweltproblematik

Cited by 26 publications

References 2 publications

Akzeptanz durch inputorientierte Organisationskommunikation

Akzeptanz durch inputorientierte Organisationskommunikation

An Ethical Appraisal of Hormesis: Towards a Rational Discourse on the Acceptability of Risks and Benefits

An ethical appraisal of hormesis: toward a rational discourse on the acceptability of risks and benefits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About