Per Wikman Svahn

This aim of this thesis is to examine ethical aspects of radiation protection from ionizing radiation. Radiation protection is the professional field that deals with the protection of humans and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation. The field is based on scientific knowledge of the health effects of radiation, but also on ethical value judgements. This thesis consists of a summary and three essays. Essay 1 gives an overview of ethical issues in radiation protection. Based on this overview four ethical problem areas are identified as central for radiation protection. The first are ethical problems related to uncertainty and the influence of value judgements, especially in scientific risk assessment. The second problem area is ethical issues regarding distributions of risks and benefits between different individuals, both in space and time. The third general problem area is related to limit-setting. A major problem here is how to set limits in an ethically justifiable way when there is no known level of exposure that is associated with a zero risk. The fourth area concerns procedural justice and social decision-making in radiation protection. Essay 2 discusses ethical problems related to the proposal that individual risks below a certain level should be excluded from the system of radiation protection, without any regard to the number of people exposed. It is concluded that there are at least three problems associated with disregarding very small risks: that many small risks to an individual may add up to a large risk for that individual, that many small risks to many individuals may add up to a large expected value of harm, and that a small risk each to many individuals may add up to a large probability that several people are harmed. It is also argued that the proposal is hard to justify in a rights-based ethical setting. Essay 3 examines what makes one distribution of individual doses better than another. This is done by creating a mathematical framework, based on preference logic, in which such assessments of can be made precisely in terms of comparisons between alternative distributions of individual doses. Principles from radiation protection and from parallel discussions in moral philosophy and welfare economics are defined using this framework and then analysed on basis of their formal properties. The analysis shows that there can be efficiency-related problems with a strict application of individual dose constraints. It is concluded that a principle that assigns extra weight to individual doses exceeding a certain limit, in proportion to the size of the excess dose, may be preferable to the standard combination of principles in radiation protection, since it satisfies efficiency related properties better without sacrificing other desirable properties.

Standard tools used in societal risk management such as probabilistic risk analysis or cost–benefit analysis typically define risks in terms of only probabilities and consequences and assume a utilitarian approach to ethics that aims to maximize expected utility. The philosopher Carl F. Cranor has argued against this view by devising a list of plausible aspects of the acceptability of risks that points towards a non-consequentialist ethical theory of societal risk management. This paper revisits Cranor’s list to argue that the alternative ethical theory responsibility-catering prioritarianism can accommodate the aspects identified by Cranor and that the elements in the list can be used to inform the details of how to view risks within this theory. An approach towards operationalizing the theory is proposed based on a prioritarian social welfare function that operates on responsibility-adjusted utilities. A responsibility-catering prioritarian ethical approach towards managing risks is a promising alternative to standard tools such as cost–benefit analysis.

This thesis is based on the assumption that the intersection of moral philosophy and practical risk management is a rewarding area to study. In particular, the thesis assumes that concepts, ideas, and methods that are used in moral philosophy can be of great benefit for risk analysis, but also that practices in risk regulation provide a useful testing ground for moral philosophical theories. The thesis consists of an introduction and five articles. Article I is a review article on social and ethical aspects of radiation protection related to nuclear power generation. The paper concludes that four areas of social and ethical issues stand out as central: The first is uncertainty and the influence of value judgments in scientific risk assessments. The second is the distributions of risks and benefits between different individuals, in both space and time. The third is the problem of setting limits when there is no known level of exposure associated with a zero risk. The fourth is related to stakeholder influence and risk communication. Article II discusses ethical issues related to the proposal that doses below a certain level should be excluded from the system of radiation protection, without any regard for the number of people exposed. Different arguments for excluding small radiation doses from regulation are examined and a possible solution to the problem of regulating small risks is proposed in the article: Any exclusion of small doses from radiation protection ought to be based on a case-by-case basis, with the condition that the expected value of harm remains small. Article III examines what makes one distribution of individual doses better than another distribution. The article introduces a mathematical framework based on preference logic, in which such assessments can be made precisely in terms of comparisons between alternative distributions of individual doses. Principles of radiation protection and from parallel discussions in moral philosophy and welfare economics are defined using this framework and their formal properties analyzed. Article IV argues that the ethical theory of “responsibility-catering prioritarianism” is well positioned to deal with the reasonable requirements in an ethical theory of risk. The article shows how responsibility-catering prioritarianism can be operationalized using a prioritarian social welfare function based on hypothetical utilities. For this purpose, a hypothetical utility measure called ‘responsibility-adjusted utility’ is proposed, which is based on the utility that would normally be expected given circumstances outside of the control of the individual. Article V was written as a response to the Fukushima disaster. Several authors have called the Fukushima disaster a ‘black swan.’ However, the article argues that the hazards of large earthquakes and tsunamis were known before the accident, and introduces and defines the concept of a ‘black elephant,’ as a high-impact event that lies beyond the realm of regular expectations, but is ignored despite existing evidence.

Value sensitive design aims at creating better technology based on social and ethical values. However, VSD has not been applied to long-term and uncertain future developments, such as societal planning for climate change. This paper describes a new method that combines elements from VSD with scenario planning. The method was developed for and applied to a case study of adaptation to sea level rise in southern Sweden in a series of workshops. The participants of the workshops found that the method provided a framework for discussing long-term planning, enabled identification of essential values, challenged established planning practices, helped find creative solutions, and served as a reminder that we do not know what will happen in the future. Finally, we reflect on the limitations of the method and suggest further research on how it can be improved for value sensitive design of adaptation measures to manage uncertain future sea level rise.

Standard tools used in societal risk management such as probabilistic risk analysis or cost–benefit analysis typically define risks in terms of only probabilities and consequences and assume a utilitarian approach to ethics that aims to maximize expected utility. The philosopher Carl F. Cranor has argued against this view by devising a list of plausible aspects of the acceptability of risks that points towards a non-consequentialist ethical theory of societal risk management. This paper revisits Cranor’s list to argue that the alternative ethical theory responsibility-catering prioritarianism can accommodate the aspects identified by Cranor and that the elements in the list can be used to inform the details of how to view risks within this theory. An approach towards operationalizing the theory is proposed based on a prioritarian social welfare function that operates on responsibility-adjusted utilities. A responsibility-catering prioritarian ethical approach towards managing risks is a promising alternative to standard tools such as cost–benefit analysis.