Globalisation, environmental harm, and progress: The role of consensus and liability

Water Science and Technology

Volumn 52, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 43-50

  Zandvoort, H ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Consensus; External costs; Globalisation; Liability; Precautionary principle; Social progress

Indexed keywords

COSTS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; POLLUTION; RISKS;

CONSENSUS; EXTERNAL COSTS; GLOBALISATION; LIABILITY; PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE; SOCIAL PROGRESS;

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION;

CHEMICAL COMPOUND; FOSSIL FUEL; OIL;

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; GLOBALIZATION; LIABILITY; PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE;

ARTICLE; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENERGY YIELD; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HEALTH HAZARD; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL LIABILITY; MARKETING; NUCLEAR ACCIDENT; POLLUTION CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 28244489278     PISSN: 02731223     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2005.0149     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Asselt, M.B.A. van and Vos, E. (2005). The precautionary principle in times of intermingled uncertainty and risk: some regulatory complexities. Water Science and Technology, 52(6), 35-41.
2. Beaumol, W. and Oates, W. (1988). The Theory of Environmental Policy, 2nd edn, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
3. IATP (Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy) (2004). Towards a liability and compensation regime under the biosafety protocol. Dawkins, K. and DuBois, J. (eds). Available at http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm
4. IELRC (International Environmental Law Research Centre) (2002). The biosafety protocol: an introduction, Cullet, P. (ed.). Available at http://www.ielrc.org/publications_briefing_papers.php
5. IPS (Institute for Policy Studies) (2004). A Wrong Turn from Rio. The World Bank's Road to Climate Catastrophe, Vallette, J., Wysham, D. and Martinez, N. (eds). Available at http://www.seen.org
6. Pelzer, N. (2003). Modernizing the international regime governing nuclear third party liability. Oil, Gas and Energy Law Intelligence, 1(5), December 2003.
7. Radetzki, M. and Radetzki, M. (1997). Liability of nuclear and other industrial corporations for large scale accident damage. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 15(4), 366-386.
8. Rogers, M. (2003). The European Commission's White Paper "Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy" A Review. Risk Analysis, 23(2), 381-388.
9. Shavell, S. (1987). Economic Analysis of Accident Law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
10. Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Text available on the website of the Adam Smith Institute, http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-intro.htm.
11. Steger, M. (2002). Globalism. The New Market Ideology. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham MD, USA.
12. Shrader-Frechette, K. (1991). Risk and Rationality. Philosophical Foundations for Populist Reforms, University of California Press, Berkeley.
13. Velsen, J.F.C. van (2000). Relativity, universality and peaceful coexistence. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 86(1), 88-108.
14. Velsen, J.F.C. van (2003). The Law of Logic. Available at http://www.lawoflogic.net/
15. Zandvoort, H. (2000). Self determination, strict liability, and ethical problems in engineering. In: The Empirical Turn in the Philosophy of Technology, Kroes, P. and Meijers, A. (eds.), Elsevier Science Inc., Amsterdam, pp. 219-243.
16. Zandvoort, H. (2004). Liability, and Controlling Technological Risks. Ethical and Decision Theoretical Foundations. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management PSAM 7 - ESREL '04, Spitzer, Schmocker, V. and Dang, V. (eds), Springer, Berlin, pp. 2815-2820.