Use of Technical Expert Panels: Applications to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis*

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) is a methodology that estimates the likelihood that various levels of earthquake-caused ground motions will be exceeded at a given location in a given future time period. Due to large uncertainties in all of the geosciences data and in their modeling, multiple model interpretations are often possible. This leads to disagreements among the experts, which in the past has led to disagreement on the selection of a ground motion for design at a given site. This paper reports on a project, co-sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Electric Power Research Institute, that was undertaken to review the state-of-the-art and improve on the overall stability of the PSHA process, by providing methodological guidance on how to perform a PSHA. The project reviewed past studies and examined ways to improve on the present state-of-the-art. In analyzing past PSHA studies, the most important conclusion is that differences in PSHA results are commonly due to process rather than technical differences. Thus, the project concentrated heavily on developing process recommendations, especially on the use of multiple experts, and this paper reports on those process recommendations. The problem of facilitating and integrating the judgments of a diverse group of experts is analyzed in detail. The authors believe that the concepts and process principles apply just as well to non-earthquake fields such as volcanic hazard, flood risk, nuclear-plant safety, and climate change.     

Including ADHD?

This article tries to make sense of the recent rise of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Britain by focussing on the contribution of the press, parents organisations, 'experts' and the drug companies, in the context of the current marketisation of education and health services. It draws on findings from a research project which studied press coverage of ADHD, and argues that the existence of active parents' organisations pushing for medical diagnoses and drug treatment for their children presents a challenge to our thinking about inclusion.