1. Full citation. Vogel, David. The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety, and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press, 2012.
2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? (This question only has to be answered once for Vogel.)
David Vogal is currently a Professor in Business Ethics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a member of both thePolitical Science Department and theHaas School of Business, and is Editor of the California Management Review. Vogel has a BA in political science from Queens College CUNY and a PhD in politics from Princeton University, and has previously written about globalization and corporate social responsibility. 3. What are the topics of the text?
This chapter discusses the history of regulations, comparing the USA and the EU since around 1950.
4. What is the main argument of the text?
The chapter’s argument is that the current state of affairs is opposite of what it was before 1990. The EU used to have less strict regulations surrounding new technologies and the environment then did the USA, which was a regulatory leader up until 1990, when suddenly the baton was handed off to the EU, and the USA stopped being as aggressive in regulations.
5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
The book cites a timeline of events regarding regulation, clearly showing a shift in the title of “most reserved” between the two regions, shifting from the US pre 1990 to the EU post 1990.
In 1996 US filed a formal complaint with the WTO challenging the EU’s ban on the sale of beef with growth hormones
The diffusion of regulatory policy from the US to the EU is cited, and backed by the citing of several regulations in the EU that follow in the footsteps of the US’s pre 1990 regulations.
6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
“European states were heavily influenced U.S. environmental policy developments in the 1960s and 1970s. Many policy ideas and programs diffused across the Atlantic.” P.11
“Much of my analysis focuses on regulatory decisions and no-decisions made on either side of the idea of the Atlantic since 1990, since my primary objective is to compare and explain the changes in risk regulations that have occurred since then.” P. 20
“According to an American corporate lobbyist based in Brussels, “Twenty years ago, if you designed something to U.S. standards you could pretty much sell it all over the world. Now the shoe is on the other foot.””P. 15
7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
What other methods of dealing with risk are there besides the polar philosophies of precautionary principle and… whatever it is the U.S. is doing?
Does a shift in the policy represent a cyclic pattern brought about by increased globalization, or is the shift exist a singular event?
Where does this shift forecast the next 50 years of regulation will lead us to?
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.)
Wiener, Jonathan. Whose Precaution After All? A Comment on the Comparison and Evolution of Risk Regulatory Systems SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, October 30, 2003. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=460262.
This paper discusses the relationship between the US and EU regulations and policy decisions, arguing that they are not completely different, nor can you argue that one is absolutely more risk adverse then the other. The paper discusses that in some fields the US is more risk adverse, such as in youth violence, terrorism, and particulate air pollution. The paper makes the argument for a higher level analysis of risk policies, considering how each region plays off each other in their policy decisions.
Schreurs, M. A., Selin, H., & VanDeveer, S. D. (2009). Expanding transatlantic relations: implications for environment and energy politics. Transatlantic Environment and Energy Politics. Comparative and International Perspectives. Surrey and Burlington. Ashgate Publishing.
Vogel, David. The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety, and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press, 2012.
2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? (This question only has to be answered once for Vogel.)
David Vogal is currently a Professor in Business Ethics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a member of both the Political Science Department and the Haas School of Business, and is Editor of the California Management Review. Vogel has a BA in political science from Queens College CUNY and a PhD in politics from Princeton University, and has previously written about globalization and corporate social responsibility.
3. What are the topics of the text?
This chapter discusses the history of regulations, comparing the USA and the EU since around 1950.
4. What is the main argument of the text?
The chapter’s argument is that the current state of affairs is opposite of what it was before 1990. The EU used to have less strict regulations surrounding new technologies and the environment then did the USA, which was a regulatory leader up until 1990, when suddenly the baton was handed off to the EU, and the USA stopped being as aggressive in regulations.
5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
The book cites a timeline of events regarding regulation, clearly showing a shift in the title of “most reserved” between the two regions, shifting from the US pre 1990 to the EU post 1990.
In 1996 US filed a formal complaint with the WTO challenging the EU’s ban on the sale of beef with growth hormones
The diffusion of regulatory policy from the US to the EU is cited, and backed by the citing of several regulations in the EU that follow in the footsteps of the US’s pre 1990 regulations.
6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
“European states were heavily influenced U.S. environmental policy developments in the 1960s and 1970s. Many policy ideas and programs diffused across the Atlantic.” P.11
“Much of my analysis focuses on regulatory decisions and no-decisions made on either side of the idea of the Atlantic since 1990, since my primary objective is to compare and explain the changes in risk regulations that have occurred since then.” P. 20
“According to an American corporate lobbyist based in Brussels, “Twenty years ago, if you designed something to U.S. standards you could pretty much sell it all over the world. Now the shoe is on the other foot.””P. 15
7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
What other methods of dealing with risk are there besides the polar philosophies of precautionary principle and… whatever it is the U.S. is doing?
Does a shift in the policy represent a cyclic pattern brought about by increased globalization, or is the shift exist a singular event?
Where does this shift forecast the next 50 years of regulation will lead us to?
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.)
Wiener, Jonathan. Whose Precaution After All? A Comment on the Comparison and Evolution of Risk Regulatory Systems SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, October 30, 2003. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=460262.
This paper discusses the relationship between the US and EU regulations and policy decisions, arguing that they are not completely different, nor can you argue that one is absolutely more risk adverse then the other. The paper discusses that in some fields the US is more risk adverse, such as in youth violence, terrorism, and particulate air pollution. The paper makes the argument for a higher level analysis of risk policies, considering how each region plays off each other in their policy decisions.
Schreurs, M. A., Selin, H., & VanDeveer, S. D. (2009). Expanding transatlantic relations: implications for environment and energy politics. Transatlantic Environment and Energy Politics. Comparative and International Perspectives. Surrey and Burlington. Ashgate Publishing.
See my Follow-Up annotation.