Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:45:15.853Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lessons from the EU's REACH Program

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Adam Abelkop ,
John D. Graham  and
Lois R. Wise
Adam Abelkop
Affiliation:
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
John D. Graham
Affiliation:
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
Lois R. Wise
Affiliation:
West European Studies and The European Union Center, School of Public & Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the casual political rhetoric about environmental regulation, it is often claimed that the U.S. government regulates on the basis of risk while the European Union (or EU member states) regulates on the basis of hazard. The implication is that the U.S. government relies on a more rigorous, scientific process of assessment than does the EU, which allegedly helps explain why the EU is more pro-regulation than is the United States.

An alternative view, advanced originally by the late Professor Aaron Wildavsky of the University of California-Berkeley and amplified in a recent book by Professor Jonathan Wiener of Duke University, and colleagues, is that societies engage in a process of “risk selection.” What worries some societies does not worry others.

Type
Symposium on Risk versus Hazard
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 181 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Wiener, Jonathan B., Rogers, Michael D., Hammitt, James K., and Sand, Peter H. (eds), The Reality of Precaution: Comparing Risk Regulation in the United States and Europe (Washington D.C. and London: RFF Press/Earthscan 2011)Google Scholar.

2 Ragnar E. Lofstedt, “Risk Versus Hazard: How to Regulate in the 21st Century”, in this volume, pp. 149 et sqq.

3 The European Chemicals Agency has published twenty-four guidance documents to assist regulated parties on compliance with each of the various aspects of REACH. They are available on the Internet at <http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/guidance_en.htm>.

4 See European Chemicals Agency, “Guidance on Registration”, Jan. 2011, available on the Internet at <http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/docs/guidance_document/registration_en.pdf?vers=31_01_11>.

5 See European Chemicals Agency, “Guidance on the Preparation of an Application for Authorization”, Jan. 2011, available on the Internet at <http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/docs/guidance_document/authorisation_application_en.pdf>.

6 See European Chemicals Agency, “Guidance on the Preparation of Socio-Economic Analysis as Part of an Application for Authorization”, Jan. 2011, available on the Internet at <http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/docs/guidance_document/sea_authorisation_en.pdf>.