Worst things first? : the debate over risk-based national environmental priorities

著者

書誌事項

Worst things first? : the debate over risk-based national environmental priorities

edited by Adam M. Finkel and Dominic Golding

Resources for the Future, c1994

  • : pbk

大学図書館所蔵 件 / 全26件

この図書・雑誌をさがす

注記

Papers presented at a conference held from November 15 to 17, 1992, in Annapolis, Maryland

Includes bibliographical references

内容説明・目次

巻冊次

ISBN 9780915707744

内容説明

Momentum is growing to improve the haphazard way in which America's environmental priorities are determined. Influential members of Congress and federal officials, among others, are asking whether regulators actually devote their greatest attention to problems presenting the greatest ecological and health risks. Priority-setting that is more rational and dispassionate, the argument goes, would provide the way out of the "ready, fire, aim" syndrome that characterizes a crisis-of-the-month approach. Increasingly, the technique of comparative risk assessment is advanced as the key to more efficient and sensible planning. Despite its growing popularity, however, serious doubts exist about the adequacy of risk assessment for setting priorities. "Worst Things First" explores the controversy over selecting an approach to set the nation's environmental priorities. Even though broad agreement exists that change is necessary, some critics feel the scientific data-collecting procedures of risk assessment constitute an intolerable delay for addressing more obvious and urgent problems; others fear its widespread use in regulatory agencies would move Congress from the centre of the advocacy process, replacing public participation with expert elitism. Additional major concerns are uncertainty (do we know a "bigger" risk when we see it?), commensurability (how can we compare cancers and whales?), and "asking the wrong questions" (is ranking problems an intellectual exercise when "solutions" are what the country really needs?). Resources for the Future convened a major conference in November 1992 to present a forum where EPA could describe its current and future plans for pursuing risk-based planning and hear suggestions for improving its methods, process and implementation. Advocates of paradigms that give risk assessment little or no role were also able to present their best argument. "Worst Things First?" contains the papers of that important three-day meeting. As the papers reveal, participants generally agreed that several different, legitimate ways exist to target the nation's resources for environmental protection. Conferees clashed over whether these different approaches are complementary or at odds. Broad acknowledgment emerged that, despite EPA's emphasis on one particular paradigm to date, the nation is not yet ready to agree on how to set environmental priorities, let alone on what the priorities themselves should be.
巻冊次

: pbk ISBN 9780915707768

内容説明

For any government agency, the distribution of available resources among problems or programs is crucially important. Agencies, however, typically lack a self-conscious process for examining priorities, much less an explicit method for defining what priorities should be. Worst Things First? illustrates the controversy that ensues when previously implicit administrative processes are made explicit and subjected to critical examination. It reveals surprising limitations to quantitative risk assessment as an instrument for precise tuning of policy judgments. The book also demonstrates the strength of political and social forces opposing the exclusive use of risk assessment in setting environmental priorities.

目次

ForewordTerry DaviesPrefaceAdam M. Finkel and Dominic GoldingPart I: IntroductionConference Background and Overview1. Should We---and Can We---Reduce the Worst Risks First?Adam M. FinkelKeynote Address2. Rationalism and Redemocratization: Time for a TruceAlice M. RivlinPart II: The EPA ParadigmFraming the Debate3. EPA's Vision for Setting National Environmental PrioritiesF. Henry Habicht II4. An Overview of Risk-Based Priority Setting at EPACharles W. Kent and Frederick W. Allen5. Integrating Science, Values, and Democracy through Comparative Risk AssessmentJonathan Lash6. A Proposal to Address, Rather than Rank, Environmental ProblemsMary O'BrienMethodological Concerns7. Current Priority-Setting Methodology: Too Little Rationality or Too Much?Dale Hattis and Robert L. Goble8. Quantitative Risk Ranking: More Promise Than the Critics SuggestM. Granger MorganProcedural Concerns9. Paradigms, Process, and Politics: Risk and Regulatory DesignDonald T. Hornstein10. Is Reducing Risk the Real Objective of Risk Management?Richard B. BelzerImplementation Concerns11. State Concerns in Setting Environmental Priorities: Is the Risk-Based Paradigm the Best We Can Do?Victoria J. Tschinkel12. The States: The National Laboratory for the Risk-Based Paradigm?G. Tracy Mehan IIIConsolidating the Discussions13. Working Group DiscussionsAdam M. Finkel and Dominic GoldingPart III: Three Alternative ParadigmsThe Prevention Paradigm14. Pollution Prevention: Putting Comparative Risk Assessment in Its PlaceBarry Commoner15. Hammers Don't Cut Wood: Why We Need Pollution Prevention and Comparative Risk AssessmentJohn D. GrahamThe Environmental Justice Paradigm16. Unequal Environmental Protection: Incorporating Environmental Justice in Decision MakingRobert D. Bullard17. Risk-Based Priorities and Environmental JusticeAlbert L. NicholsThe Industrial Transformation Paradigm18. An Innovation-Based Strategy for the EnvironmentNicholas A. Ashford19. Promoting Innovation 'The Easy Way'James D. WilsonPart IV: Conclusions20. Summary of Closing Panel DiscussionAdam M. Finkel and Dominic Golding21. Recurring Themes and Points of ContentionAdam M. Finkel and Dominic Golding22. AfterthoughtsAdam M. FinkelAppendix

「Nielsen BookData」 より

詳細情報

ページトップへ