Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

educated, being female rather think emotionally than the older, more educated andbeing male do. Additionally we explore the relations between dependent emotionaljudgment and independent social-constructed variables such as trust, benefit/risk andknowledge. Second, there are varieties of emotional response, we will analyze howthe different kinds of emotion, for examples gloomy/good, weak/strong, dirty/clear,retrogressive/progressive, are determined by different causal factors. In short, weexpected that this study would contribute to elaborating the structure and content ofemotion in judging the nuclear power.W2-E.3 Kadry AM, Woodall GM, Reid J; kadry.abdel@epa.govUS Environmental Protection AgencyRAPID RISK EVALUATIONS: APPLICATIONS, CHALLENGES ANDLIMITATIONSVarious government agencies develop risk assessments to characterize the natureand magnitude of health risks to humans from chemical contaminants and otherstressors that may be present in the environment. The development of completequantitative risk assessments can require extensive resources and time. Rapid RiskEvaluation (RRE) is an important tool used by risk assessors under certain circumstancesto provide a qualitative and/or quantitative risk assessment within a veryshort time (usually minutes to a few weeks). The current presentation will explorethe tools that are under development at the EPA’s National Center for EnvironmentalAssessment (NCEA) which may be useful in implementing a successful RRE.These include use of graphical tools to array the available dose-response data and/orhealth effect reference values available for the agent being considered, or those thatare closely related in structure or function. Principles for developing toxicity valuesusing structural-surrogates for chemicals that lack adequate human or animal studieswill be presented. Some semi-quantitative methods are being developed and will bedescribed. The challenges and limitations to the use of these tools in RRE will bediscussed in detail. The views expressed in this abstract do not necessarily reflect theviews or policies of the US EPA.M3-I.2 Kaul S, Boyle K, Pope J, Parmeter C, Kuminoff N, Moeltner K*;kjboyle@vt.eduVirginia TechROBUST META-ANALYSIS USING MEDIAN-QUANTILE AND NON-PARAMETRIC REGRESSION PROCEDURES: INVESTIGATING THEVALIDITY OF BENEFIT TRANSFERSIn 2005 the U.S. EPA sponsored a forum to inform the practice of benefitstransfer. Interest in this topic was demonstrated by presenters from Australia, Canada,France, Spain, Singapore, United Kingdom and United States. U.S. interest in benefittransfer is motivated by Presidential Executive Order 12866 (1993) that requires federalagencies to assess “costs and benefits” of regulations based “on best reasonably126obtainable scientific, technical, economic, and other information.” Previous researchon validity of benefit transfers suggest that function transfers are more accurate thanvalue transfers and similarity between study and policy cases favors transfer applications.Despite these suggested points, Johnston and Rosenberger (2009) claim that“complexity and relative disorganization of the (academic) literature may represent anobstacle to the use of updated methods by practitioners.” In this paper we conduct arobust meta-analysis of existing convergent-validity studies to identify benefit-transferpractices that effect validity of transfer applications. We investigate the robustnessof baseline models (ordinary least squares and weighted least squares) by employingquantile and nonparametric regression techniques. Data from 31 convergent validitystudies was used to estimate a reduced form meta-analysis equation. Our baselinemodels were sensitive to the influence of outliers and there was little consensus betweenbaseline and nonparametric results. However, the analyses present some clearresults (function transfers are more accurate than single value transfers) and identifiesareas of research to improve transfers (defining study similarity between study casesand policy cases). While these robustness analyses are done in the context of benefittransfers, the application of these methods is generalizable to any reuse of existingdata for risk analyses and valuation of alternative outcomes.W1-B.2 Kause J, Dearfield K, Ebel ED, Golden NJ, LaBarre D, Disney T; janell.kause@fsis.usda.govGovernmentUSE OF RISK ASSESSMENT WITH RISK MANAGEMENT METRICSTO LINK PUBLIC HEALTH ESTIMATES TO FOOD SAFETY PERFOR-MANCEIn 2008, the Codex Alimentarius approved the use of newer risk managementmetrics that would help link public health estimates to food safety performance. Thetraditional metrics used before this time, i.e., microbiological criteria (MC), processcriteria (PcC), and product criteria (PdC), provided both a means of articulating thelevel of stringency expected of a food safety control system and verifying that thislevel of control is being achieved. However, these traditional risk management toolshave generally not been linked directly to a specific level of public health protection.New food safety risk management metrics, i.e., the food safety objective (FSO), performanceobjective (PO), and performance criteria (PC), are intended to provide abridge between traditional food safety metrics (MC, PcC, PdC) and the expected levelof public health protection. These new metrics provide a potential means of articulatingthe level of stringency required of a food safety system at different points inthe farm-to-table continuum and provide a more direct link to the appropriate levelof protection (ALOP) concept presented the World Trade Organization Sanitary andPhytosanitary (SPS) Agreement. USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service is exploringapproaches to utilize microbial risk assessments to elucidate the use of these