In a companion paper (Beckers et al. 2022), we defined a qualitative notion of harm: either harm is caused, or it is not. For practical applications, we often need to quantify harm; for example, we may want to choose the lest harmful of a set of possible interventions. We first present a quantitative definition of harm in a deterministic context involving a single individual, then we consider the issues involved in dealing with uncertainty regarding the context and going from a notion of harm for a single individual to a notion of "societal harm", which involves aggregating the harm to individuals. We show that the "obvious" way of doing this (just taking the expected harm for an individual and then summing the expected harm over all individuals can lead to counterintuitive or inappropriate answers, and discuss alternatives, drawing on work from the decision-theory literature.
翻译:在一份配套文件(Beckers et al. 2022)中,我们界定了伤害的定性概念:要么造成伤害,要么不是造成伤害。为了实际应用,我们常常需要量化损害;例如,我们可能希望选择一套可能的干预措施的危害性;我们首先在涉及单个个人的决定性背景下提出伤害的量化定义,然后我们考虑处理背景不确定性所涉及的问题,从单个个人的伤害概念转向“社会伤害”概念,这涉及对个人的伤害。我们表明,“明显的”方法(只是为个人承担预期的伤害,然后将预期的伤害归纳到所有个人的身上)可以导致反直觉或不适当的答案,并讨论替代方法,借鉴决策理论文献的工作。