Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

addition, over 10% thought that every pound of ground beef and every egg shouldbe tested, even though it was explained that once tested the product could not be soldor consumed, and would result in an increased cost to the consumer. In terms of reconditioning,fewer than 20% thought it was okay: a) to eat fully cooked recalled eggsat home, b) to sell potentially contaminated eggs that had been pasteurized to otherfood producers, and c) to sell potentially contaminated eggs that had been pasteurizeddirectly to consumers. A between-subjects analysis focused on the potential impactsof disgust, and indicated that describing the pathogen in contaminated ground beefas originating in feces had no significant effect on the percentage of consumers whofelt it was okay to consume it after it had been safely cooked.P.72 Cuite CL, Johnson BB, McWilliams RM, Hallman WK; cuite@aesop.rutgers.eduRutgers, The State University of New JerseyEXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION INTO PUBLIC RESPONSE TOFOOD TERRORISM VS. ACCIDENTAL CONTAMINATIONA primary goal of food terrorism is to undermine confidence in the food system.A national Internet survey of 1,204 American adults was conducted to test thelikely impact of intentional food contamination. Respondents read a scenario abouta nationwide contamination incident affecting multiple foods and were then randomizedinto 1 of 3 conditions: “intentional” where it was caused by someone who“knowingly and purposefully tried to hurt people;” “accidental” where it was the resultof “natural causes in the course of producing the food;” and control in which nocause was given. Manipulation checks indicated that the intervention worked: those inthe intentional condition were significantly more likely to believe that the contaminationwas purposeful and less likely to believe that it was accidental, normal, caused bytechnology, or natural than those in the other conditions; and, those in the accidentalcondition were more likely to believe the contamination was accidental. Ratings ofhow widespread the contamination was, how serious the illness, and how risky itwould be to eat the food did not vary by condition, indicating that the intentionalityof the event did not influence respondents’ objective impact assessments. Althoughthose in the intentional condition were significantly more likely to feel angry and lesslikely to feel neutral, there were no differences across condition on the majority ofthe other emotional responses measured (e.g., how frightened, worried, or happy theyfeel while thinking about the situation). Additional analyses indicated that there weremain effects of gender and education level on many of the dependent variables, butthese did not interact with the intentionality factor. Although a limitation of the studyis its hypothetical nature, these data suggest that the public’s objective assessment ofthe risks posed by a food contamination incident may not be significantly affected bythe perceived intentionality of the contamination.T2-F.4 Cullen A, Smoliak B, Po-Chedley S, Anderson CL; alison@u.washington.eduEvans School of Public Affairs, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Program on Climate Change,University of WashingtonASSESSING CLIMATE AS A FACTOR IN CROP YIELD IN SUBSAHA-RAN AFRICAFood insecurity is an integral part of poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa. Risks tolivelihood result directly from changing or unreliable cultivation conditions, whichpose particularly severe challenges to small-scale farmers. Climate variability hasbeen predicted to affect agriculture in vulnerable regions of Sub-Saharan Africa byaltering yields and shifting the area suitable for cultivation. In fact, the combination ofclimate factors and plant physiological responses affects cultivation in complex ways,both positive and negative. Under an emissions scenario consistent with currentdevelopment trends, IPCC-coordinated climate model results project a high likelihoodof warming in this region during the twenty-first century. In 11 Sub-SaharanAfrican countries, the coincidence between current growing season temperature andprojected future conditions (overlap) is projected to be less than 20% by 2050. Inother words, the hottest growing seasons of the late twentieth century would appearanomalously cool with reference to the projected climate of 2050. The factors affectingprecipitation are considerably more complicated, and involve small-scale phenomenathat are not resolved in general circulation models, GCMs. Despite pronounceduncertainty, GCMs predict both wetter and drier conditions, depending on geographiclocation within the region. We use historical data and climate model projections toprovide regional estimates of climate and growing condition variability. We link theseto observed historical crop yields and generate expected yield responses based onprojected temperature and precipitation trends. We use regression and factor analytictechniques as a means of identifying internal structure in the relationships betweenprecipitation and temperature. We also assess the role of climate as a driver of yieldfor pivotal crops upon which local populations rely for sustenance.M4-A.3 Cummings CL; christopherlcummings@gmail.comNorth Carolina State UniversitySTRATEGIC FRAME ALIGNMENT AND THE COMMUNICATION OFRISKIn the past 30 years, the concept of framing has emerged and taken variousshapes in attempting to explain how risk messages come to be understood by individuals.Through its varied use, the concept of framing has become muddled, composedof profuse components borrowed, reapproriated and distorted from competing theoristsamong distinct disciplines. In the communication of risk, framing studies havebeen dominated by investigations of mass media which posit that the public comes tolearn about risks through broad-based communication about hazards and risk events.83