From the Editors

We begin the issue with a letter by Kevin Konty et al. about a paper by Walter Piegorsch et al.(1) which used a place-based vulnerabilty index to characterize 132 U.S. cities. Konty and colleagues from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene question the data and conclusions. The authors respond that their focus is on event consequences, not on the ability to predict future terrorist events. Five of the ten papers in this issue are contributions to risk assessment. John Bukowksi's perspective paper examines cancer risk among workers exposed to chloroprene. With a grant from the International Institute of Synthetic Rubber, he focuses on liver, lung, and lymphohematopoietic cancers, which early studies found to have relatively high numbers of cases. Using a set of studies from across the world, Bukowksi observes a strong healthy worker effect, which could have obscured small excess risks. Small increased risks were suggested by internal or company-specific analyses, but, he asserts, these may be explained by confounding factors. Hamid Mohtadi and Antu Panini Murshid, supported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, assess historical trends (1950–2005) in food sector bioterrorism. They point to a disturbing shortening in the re-occurrence period for attacks on food supplies. Specifically, they find that the frequency of catastrophic terrorist events, i.e., those with large numbers of casualties, is on the rise and the average reoccurrence period for such scale attacks is on the decline. Thus, for example, by the year 2025, an attack leading to 5,000 casualties would be expected to occur every 20 months, if not more often. Funded by the United States Department of Agriculture, Frank Koch et al. examine factors that influence the spread of pests across the landscape, in this case Sirex noctilio, a non-native wood wasp recently detected in the United States and Canada. They concentrate on how increased uncertainty in a risk model's numeric assumptions affects the spread of pests. Supported by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Mark Nicas and Rachael Jones analyze the relative contribution of four influenza virus exposure pathways—(1) virus-contaminated hand contact with facial membranes, (2) inhalation of respirable cough particles, (3) inhalation of inspirable cough particles, and (4) spray of cough droplets onto facial membranes. The authors identify four key data gaps that if addressed would reduce the uncertainty about diffusion of influenza viruses. The first methyl mercury-poisoning episode, called Minamata disease, was recorded in Japan during the 1950s, and was due to consumption of highly polluted fish. Ying Zhang et al. propose a model to describe the relationship between fish consumption and body methyl mercury levels in the Japanese population. The remaining five papers in this issue focus on risk perception. Supported by the National Science Foundation, Ginger Davis et al. explore the hypothesis that cyber security incidents prompt (security conscious) online customers to opt out and conduct their business elsewhere or, at the very least, to refrain from accessing online services. Notably, their results consistently indicate that cyber security incidents did not affect the structure of web traffic for the set of online businesses studied. Michael Greenberg measures public response to the idea of concentrating new nuclear power, waste management and laboratory facilities at locations with existing major nuclear plants (CLAMP) in the United States. A survey of 2,101 people who lived within 50 miles of 11 existing major nuclear sites found 34% favored CLAMP for new nuclear power plants, 52% for waste management facilities, and 50% for new nuclear laboratories. College educated, relatively affluent male whites were the strongest CLAMP supporters, an expected finding. Using a random sample from the general population of Switzerland, Carmen Keller et al. examine the effect of the radon risk ladder on risk perception. The radon risk ladder provides comparative risk information about the radon equivalent of smoking risk. These results show that the risk ladder can be a useful tool in enabling people to interpret various risk levels, especially for people with low numeracy skills. Funded by the Norwegian Research Council, Agathe Backer-Grondahl et al. analyze the difference between worry about accidents and unpleasant incidents on nine different means of ground transport. Norwegian respondents worried more about accidents than unpleasant incidents on private transport modes, and more about unpleasant incidents than accidents on public transport modes. The models of worry about accidents and worry about unpleasant incidents differed as to what predictors turned out to be significant. Using data from a Canadian survey on perceived chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE), Jennifer Lee and Louise Lemyre examine likely public responses to terrorist events. Perceived coping efficacy emerged as the cognitive factor associated with the desirable responses to terrorism. The authors note that while campaigns aimed at raising awareness about the threat of terrorism could help encourage individual preparedness and planning, they also have possible undesirable effects on worry and avoidance behaviors. The key is finding a balanced strategy. We end our editorial report by introducing Alberto Alemanno as our new Area Editor for policy. Trained in Europe and the United States, Alberto is a professor of law at HEC-Paris and is chair of the SRA Risk Policy and Law Specialty Group. Welcome Alberto!

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.