Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Is risk-based regulation feasible?
View graph of relations

Is risk-based regulation feasible?: The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs)

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Is risk-based regulation feasible? The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). / MacGillivray, Brian; Alcock, Ruth; Busby, Jeremy.

In: Risk Analysis, Vol. 31, No. 2, 02.2011, p. 266-281.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

MacGillivray B, Alcock R, Busby J. Is risk-based regulation feasible? The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). Risk Analysis. 2011 Feb;31(2):266-281. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01500.x

Author

MacGillivray, Brian ; Alcock, Ruth ; Busby, Jeremy. / Is risk-based regulation feasible? The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). In: Risk Analysis. 2011 ; Vol. 31, No. 2. pp. 266-281.

Bibtex

@article{84e3368fdf02484598b108d63fca0b9c,
title = "Is risk-based regulation feasible?: The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs)",
abstract = "The polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are a class of brominated flame retardants used extensively in an array of textiles and plastics. Initially viewed as inert and nontoxic, in recent years an emerging body of science has cast doubt on this perception. Consequently, the compounds have drawn sustained government, media, and lobby group focus in the United States and Europe, yet have taken contrasting trajectories in different risk regulation regimes. We present a longitudinal analysis of these pathways, examining the actions of legislatures, executives, courts, scientists, and pressure groups. We show that the emergence and resolution of PBDEs as a risk issue was strongly shaped by path dependency, political entrainment (inter-institutional conflict unrelated to PBDEs), and partisan lawmaking. This raises the question of whether risk-based principles are capable of being the foundation on which managing the potential for harm can be based—even when that harm is associated with specific objects like flame-retardant chemicals. We conclude by reflecting on the difficult normative issues that are raised. ",
keywords = "Chemicals regulation, risk governance, science-policy, risk regulation",
author = "Brian MacGillivray and Ruth Alcock and Jeremy Busby",
year = "2011",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01500.x",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "266--281",
journal = "Risk Analysis",
issn = "0272-4332",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is risk-based regulation feasible?

T2 - The case of polylbrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs)

AU - MacGillivray, Brian

AU - Alcock, Ruth

AU - Busby, Jeremy

PY - 2011/2

Y1 - 2011/2

N2 - The polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are a class of brominated flame retardants used extensively in an array of textiles and plastics. Initially viewed as inert and nontoxic, in recent years an emerging body of science has cast doubt on this perception. Consequently, the compounds have drawn sustained government, media, and lobby group focus in the United States and Europe, yet have taken contrasting trajectories in different risk regulation regimes. We present a longitudinal analysis of these pathways, examining the actions of legislatures, executives, courts, scientists, and pressure groups. We show that the emergence and resolution of PBDEs as a risk issue was strongly shaped by path dependency, political entrainment (inter-institutional conflict unrelated to PBDEs), and partisan lawmaking. This raises the question of whether risk-based principles are capable of being the foundation on which managing the potential for harm can be based—even when that harm is associated with specific objects like flame-retardant chemicals. We conclude by reflecting on the difficult normative issues that are raised.

AB - The polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are a class of brominated flame retardants used extensively in an array of textiles and plastics. Initially viewed as inert and nontoxic, in recent years an emerging body of science has cast doubt on this perception. Consequently, the compounds have drawn sustained government, media, and lobby group focus in the United States and Europe, yet have taken contrasting trajectories in different risk regulation regimes. We present a longitudinal analysis of these pathways, examining the actions of legislatures, executives, courts, scientists, and pressure groups. We show that the emergence and resolution of PBDEs as a risk issue was strongly shaped by path dependency, political entrainment (inter-institutional conflict unrelated to PBDEs), and partisan lawmaking. This raises the question of whether risk-based principles are capable of being the foundation on which managing the potential for harm can be based—even when that harm is associated with specific objects like flame-retardant chemicals. We conclude by reflecting on the difficult normative issues that are raised.

KW - Chemicals regulation

KW - risk governance

KW - science-policy

KW - risk regulation

U2 - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01500.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01500.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 31

SP - 266

EP - 281

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

SN - 0272-4332

IS - 2

ER -