1. Full citation.
Vogel, David. The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety, and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States. Princeton [N.J.: Princeton UP, 2012. Print.
2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials?
David Vogel is professor at the Haas School of Business and in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. His books include The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility.
3. What are the topics of the text?
The EU and the US are very similar in terms of scientific achievement, public bureaucracies, educational standards, etc. So why has transatlantic regulation become so polarized in many important policy areas?
4. What is the main argument of the text?
Transatlantic regulation has become polarized in many important policy areas because of a possible number of reasons, although none are conclusive.
5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
A possible explanation the argument explores is the dynamics of global competition
Another explanation the argument explores is that the two groups have been playing “catch up” to each other
A third set of explanations focuses on variations in rates of economic performance and relative living standards - public support for more stringent risk regulations is affected by economic and social conditions
6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
“...what changed was their political impact: compared to both the United States before 1990 and Europe since then, fewer alarm bells in the United States rang as loudly or for as long. They became less likely to produce the kind of sustained and intense public response that is necessary to turn an "alarm bell" into a "policy trigger." Equally important, the ringing of one "alarm bell" was less likely to set off a cacophony of others.” (p 41)
“According to a Gallup public opinion survey conducted in March 2010, Americans were less worried about a wide range of environmental problems than at any time during the past twenty years. Gallup primarily attributed the long and steady decline in concern... to 'a general belief among Americans that environmental conditions in the US are generally improving'. Americans did not become less committed to or concerned about protecting the environment; what did change was the extent and intensity of public support for additional regulations necessary for accomplishing this objective." (p 42)
“For most of the more stringent EU risk regulations described.... there were no important differences in the preferences of European and American firms. Both American and European firms have lobbied against many of the risk regulations... both European and American chemical firms actively challenged the European Commission’s proposal to significantly strengthen European chemical regulation... both opposed and were disadvantaged... " (p 29)
7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
How has the general public developed their views on risk, regulation, and the environment since 2010? (Gallup poll on climate change awareness specifically)
Would teaching basic statistical analysis be helpful to the public while they develop critical thinking skills and dealing with risk in general so that the public will be more understanding and informed?
What is the process from an “alarm bell going off” to turning it into a “policy trigger”? Do people write to their representatives, or how does the message get across?
8. What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your perspective on environmental risk and precaution? (Provide citations, with a brief explanation of what you learned. One of these should be fully annotated, as your second required reading for each week.)
T.R. Reid, "Be Careful What You Eat, Where You Sit and... " Washington Post National Weekly Edition, May 12-18, 2001. : I couldn’t find the exact article but I did read up on reporter T.R Reid and his work with healthcare and his many journalist accomplishments.
"Why Do Americans Feel that Danger Lurks Everywhere?" Wall Street Journal, April 3, 2003. : This article makes it seem like America is very diligent with handling risk in different scenarios. The article also talks about how marketers and the media have capitalized on people's desire for risk-free living by appealing to their vulnerability. "If you're alive, you're at risk," proclaim the ads of Destiny Group, a Newport Beach, Calif., company that insures against lawsuits. Women are "at risk for breast cancer just because they're women," declare the developers of a cancer-risk-assessment model.
Gallup poll, "Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop," March 11, 2010, available at http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/Americans-Global-Warming-Concerns-Continue-Drop.aspx, accessed 11/20/2010. : I learned that 48% of Americans polled think that global warming concerns have been greatly exaggerated in 2010. Also, in 2010 Americans were almost evenly split in their views of the cause of increases in the Earth's temperature over the last century.
Vogel, David. The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety, and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States. Princeton [N.J.: Princeton UP, 2012. Print.
2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials?
David Vogel is professor at the Haas School of Business and in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. His books include The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility.
3. What are the topics of the text?
The EU and the US are very similar in terms of scientific achievement, public bureaucracies, educational standards, etc. So why has transatlantic regulation become so polarized in many important policy areas?
4. What is the main argument of the text?
Transatlantic regulation has become polarized in many important policy areas because of a possible number of reasons, although none are conclusive.
5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
8. What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your perspective on environmental risk and precaution? (Provide citations, with a brief explanation of what you learned. One of these should be fully annotated, as your second required reading for each week.)