Policy making amid scientific uncertainty -- Cancer risk assessment : concepts and controversies -- Between science and politics : assessing the risks of dioxin -- Forbidden fruit : regulating the pesticides alachlor and alar -- Paternalism vs consumer choice : regulation of saccharin in Canada and the United States (with Colleen Rohde) -- Political insulation : the rise and fall of urea-formaldehyde foam -- Acceptable risks? Regulating asbestos in Canada and the United States (with Gregory Hein) -- The perils of paternalism : controlling radon exposure in Canadian and U.S. homes -- Conclusion : risk, science, and public policy
Summary
"Government regulation of toxic substances varies dramatically between the United States and Canada. In Risk, Science, and Politics Kathryn Harrison and George Hoberg analyse these differences and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of two very different regulatory styles." "The Canadian approach is exemplified by closed decision making, case-by-case review that relies heavily on expert judgement, and limited public debate about the scientific basis of regulatory decisions. In contrast, regulatory science in the United States is characterized by publication of lengthy rationales for regulatory decisions, reliance on standardized procedures for risk assessment, and controversy surrounding the interpretation of scientific evidence. Harrison and Hoberg's detailed comparisons will help readers understand the complexities and subtleties involved in regulation of toxic substances."--Jacket
