"Solution-focused risk assessment": A proposal for the fusion of environmental analysis and action

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 754-787

  Finkel, Adam M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision theory; Public involvement; Risk management; Standard setting; Technology options

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960868619     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: 15497860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10807039.2011.588142     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Ackerman BA and Stewart RB. 1985. Reforming environmental law. Stanford Law Rev 37(5):1333-65
2. Aggazzotti G, Fantuzzi G, Predieri G. et al. 1994. Indoor exposure to perchloroethylene (PCE) in individuals living with dry-cleaning workers. Sci Total Environ 156:133-7
3. Anastas P. 2010. The path forward. Memorandum to the USEPA Office of Research and Development, March 2010. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ord/htm/anastas/path-forward.htm
4. Ashford N. 1994. An innovation-based strategy for the environment. In: Finkel AM and Golding D (eds), Worst Things First? The Debate Over Risk-Based National Environmental Priorities, pp 275-314. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA
5. Ashford N. 2000. An innovation-based strategy for a sustainable environment. In: Hemmelskamp J, Rennings K, and Leone F (eds), Innovation-Oriented Environmental Regulation: Theoretical Approach and Empirical Analysis, pp. 67-107. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany
6. Berry W. 2002. Solving for pattern. In: Berry W and Wirzba N (eds), The Art of the Commonplace: The Agrarian Essays of Wendell Berry. Counterpoint Press, Berkeley CA, USA
7. Breyer S. 1993. Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA
8. Bullard RD. 1994. Unequal environmental protection: Incorporating environmental justice in decision making. In: Finkel AM and Golding D (eds), Worst Things First? The Debate Over Risk-Based National Environmental Priorities, pp 237-66. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA
9. Calabresi G and Bobbitt P. 1978. Tragic Choices (The Fels Lectures on Public Policy Analysis). WW Norton, New York, NY, USA
10. CDC (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2008. Neurologic illness associated with occupational exposure to the solvent 1-bromopropane-New Jersey and Pennsylvania, 2007-2008. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 57(48):1300-2, Dec. 5
11. City of Philadelphia, Department of Public Health, Air Pollution Control Board. 2010. Air Management Regulation XIV: Control of Emissions from Dry Cleaning Facilities, Approved Nov. 17, 2010. Archived at http://www.phila.gov/health/AirManagement/AirManageBoards.html
12. Commoner B. 1994. Pollution prevention: Putting comparative risk assessment in its place. In: Finkel AM and Golding D (eds), Worst Things First? The Debate Over Risk-Based National Environmental Priorities, pp 203-28. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA
13. Cooke RM. (ed). 2009. UncertaintyModeling inDose Response: Bench Testing Environmental Toxicity. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA
14. Davies JC. 2009. Oversight of Next Generation Nanotechnology. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington DC, USA
15. Domb E. 1997. The ideal final result: Tutorial. Available at http://www.triz-journal.com/archives/1997/02/a/index.html
16. Dower R, Ditz D, Faeth P, et al. (eds). 1997. Frontiers of Sustainability: Environmentally Sound Agriculture, Forestry, Transportation, and Power Production. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA
17. Evans JS, Graham JD, Gray GM, et al. 1994. A distributional approach to characterizing lowdose cancer risk. Risk Anal 14:25-34
18. Finkel AM. 1994. Risk assessment research: Only the beginning. Risk Anal 14:907-11
19. Finkel AM. 1995. A second opinion on an environmentalmisdiagnosis: The risky prescriptions of Breaking the Vicious Circle. NYU Envtl Law J 3:295-381
20. Finkel AM. 2007. Distinguishing legitimate risk-risk tradeoffs from straw men. Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, San Antonio, TX, USA
21. Finkel AM. 2009. Do risk assessors and regulatory economists approach uncertainty and variability differently? Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, Baltimore, MD, USA
22. Finkel AM. Harvesting the ripe fruit: Why is it so hard to be well-informed at the moment of decision? In: Laxminarayan R and Macauley M (eds), The Value of Information: Methodological Frontiers and New Applications in Environment and Health, Springer, New York, NY, USA. (in press)
23. Finkel AM and Evans JS. 1987. Evaluating the benefits of uncertainty reduction in environmental health risk management. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 37:1164-71
24. Finkel AM and Golding D (eds). 1994. Worst Things First? The Debate Over Risk-Based National Environmental Priorities. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA
25. Finkel AM and Ryan PB. 2007. Risk in the workplace: Where analysis began and problems remain unsolved. In: Robson MG and Toscano WA (eds), Risk Assessment for Environmental Health, pp 187-237. Association of Schools of Public Health. Jossey-Bass, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA
26. Finkel AM, Shafir E, Ferson S, et al. 2006. Transferring to Regulatory Economics the Risk-Analysis Approaches to Uncertainty, Interindividual Variability, and Other Phenomena. National Science Foundation grant #0756539, Decision Making, Risk, and Uncertainty program (Human and Social Dynamics of Change competition). National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA, USA
27. Finkel AM and Sullivan JW. 2011. A cost-benefit interpretation of the 'substantially similar' hurdle in the Congressional Review Act: Can OSHA ever utter the 'E-word' (ergonomics) again? Administrative Law Review 63(4), December 2011
28. Flournoy AC and Driesen DM (eds). 2009. Beyond Environmental Law: Policy Proposals for a Better Environmental Future. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA
29. Gibb S. 2009. Front-loading managers' input in the risk assessment process: Issues and concerns. EM ("Environmental Management," Air and Waste Management Association newsmagazine), pp 26-9, July
30. Goldstein BD. 1993. If risk management is broke, why fix risk assessment? USEPA J Jan./Feb/March:37-8
31. Goldstein BD, Perry, WG, Sofge, CW, Paustenbach DJ, Altemose B, Wilson MP, Wagner WE, and Finkel AM. 2010. Eight slide presentations from the symposium "Thirty Years after the Benzene Decision: When will Risk Assessment Benefit Workers?", presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, Salt Lake City, UT, Dec. 6. Archived at http://tinyurl.com/osha-sraandathttp://tinyurl.com/osha-sra2
32. Graham JD and Wiener JB (eds). 1995. Risk versus Risk: Tradeoffs in Protecting Health and the Environment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA
33. Harrington W, Morgenstern RD, and Nelson P. 2000. On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates. J Policy Anal Manage 19:297-322
34. Hattis D and Anderson E. 1999. What should be the implications of uncertainty, variability, and inherent "biases"/"conservatism" for risk management decision-making? Risk Anal 19:95-107
35. Hattis D, Baird S, and Goble R. 2002. A straw man proposal for a quantitative definition of the RfD. Drug Chem Toxicol 25:403-36
36. Hegstad M. 2008. EPA seeks to limit risk management considerations in assessment. Inside EPA's Risk Policy Report 15(52). Dec. 23, pp. 1, 8-9.
37. Industrial Union Department. 1980. AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, 448 U.S. 607. Available at supreme.justia.com/US/448/607/case.html
38. Keeney R. 1992. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA
39. Keeney R and von Winterfeldt D. 1986. Why indirect health risks of regulations should be examined. Interfaces 16:13-27
40. Kysar DL. 2010. Regulating from Nowhere: Environmental Law and the Search for Objectivity. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, USA
41. Latin H. 1985. Ideal versus real regulatory efficiency: Implementation of uniform standards and "fine-tuning" regulatory reforms. Stanford Law Rev 37:1267-332
42. Lipshitz R and Mann L. 2005. Leadership and decision making: William R. Ruckelshaus and the Environmental Protection Agency. J Leadership and Organizational Studies 11:41-53
43. Lomborg B (ed). 2004. Global Crises, Global Solutions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
44. Lomborg B (ed). 2006.Howto Spend $50 Billion to Make theWorld a Better Place. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
45. Lutz WK. 2001. Susceptibility differences in chemical carcinogenesis linearize the doseresponse relationship: Threshold doses can be defined only for individuals. Mutation Res 482:71-6
46. Majersik JJ, Caravati EM, and Steffens JD. 2007. Severe neurotoxicity associated with exposure to the solvent 1-bromopropane (n-propyl bromide). Clin Toxicol 45:270-6
47. McCubbin PR. 2005. The risk in technology-based standards. Duke Environ Law Policy Forum 16:1-56
48. Mirer FE. 2003. Distortions of the "mis-read" book: Adding procedural botox to paralysis by analysis. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 9:1129-43
49. Montague P. 1996. Ethical hazards of risk assessment. Rachel's Environment & HealthWeekly, November 7. Available at http://www.rachel.org/?q=en/node/3922
50. Montague P and Finkel AM. 2007. Two friends debate risk assessment and precaution. From Rachel's Democracy & Health News 920 Archived at http://www.rachel.org/?q=en/newsletters/rachels news/920-Two-Friends-Debate-Risk-Assessment-and-Precaution
51. Morris RD. 2007. Pipe dreams. New York Times (op-ed column), October 3
52. NRC (US National Research Council). 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process (the "Red Book"). National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
53. NRC. 1994. Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
54. NRC. 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
55. NRC. 2005. Risk and Decisions about Disposal of Transuranic and High-Level Radioactive Waste. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
56. NRC. 2009. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
57. NTP (US National Toxicology Program). 2009. NTP Technical Report on the Toxicology and Carcinogenesis of Studies of 1-Bromopropane in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice. NTP TR-564. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA
58. O'Brien M. 2000. Making Better Environmental Decisions: An Alternative to Risk Assessment. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA
59. O'Hanlon WH and Weiner-Davis M. 1989. In Search of Solutions: A New Direction in Psychotherapy. WW Norton, New York, NY, USA
60. Orr D. 2007. The designers' challenge. Commencement address, School of Design,University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Available at http://www.davidworr.com/more.php?articlesid=6
61. Paustenbach DJ. 1995. Retrospective on U.S. health risk assessment: How others can benefit. RISK: Health, Safety & Environment 6:283-332
62. PCCRAM (Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management). 1997. Framework for Environmental Health Risk Management-Final Report, Vol. 1, Washington, DC, USA Available at http://www.riskworld.com/nreports/1997/riskrpt/pdf/EPAJAN.PDF
63. Rascoff S and Revesz R. 2002. The biases of risk tradeoff analysis: Towards parity in environmental and health-and-safety regulation. U Chicago Law Rev 69:1763-836
64. Renner R. 2010. More iodine or less perchlorate? Environ Health Persp 118:A289
65. Revesz R and Livermore M. 2008. Retaking Rationality: How Cost-Benefit Analysis Can Better Protect the Environment and Our Health. Oxford University Press, New York City, NY, USA
66. Schnoor JL. 2009. LCA and environmental intelligence? Environ Sci Technol 43:2997
67. Segelstein J. 2008. And you think you're trying to save gas. CNBC broadcast, July 10, 2008, transcript available at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25592648/
68. Shapiro S. 2007. The role of procedural controls in OSHA's ergonomics rulemaking. Public Admin Rev 67:688-701
69. Sunstein C. 1996. Health-health tradeoffs. U Chicago Law Review 63:1533-71
70. Sunstein C. 2002. Risk and Reason: Safety, Law and the Environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
71. Tal A. 1997. A failure to engage. The Environ Forum Jan/Feb:13-21
72. Tickner J and Gouveia-Vigeant T. 2005. The 1991 cholera epidemic in Peru: Not a case of precaution gone awry. Risk Anal 25:495-502
73. University of Pennsylvania. 2006. Presidential Oversight: A Panel Discussion with Regulatory "Czars" from Reagan to Bush. University of Pennsylvania Law School, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Available at http://www.law.upenn.edu/academics/institutes/regulation/conferences/whitehouse.html
74. US Department of Labor. 2000. Ergonomics Program: Final Rule. Fed Reg 65:68261-68870, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA
75. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 1987. Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of Environmental Problems. Office of Policy Analysis, Washington, DC, USA
76. USEPA. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection. Science Advisory Board (A-101), SAB-EC-90-021, Washington, DC, USA
77. USEPA. 1992. Draft Report: A cross-species scaling factor for carcinogen risk assessment based on equivalence of mg/kg3/4/day. Fed Reg 57:24152-73
78. USEPA. 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington, DC, USA
79. USEPA. 2005. National emission standards for coke oven batteries. Final Rule. Fed Reg 70(72):19991-20015
80. USEPA. 2008. National ambient air quality standards for ozone. Fed Reg 73:16435-514
81. USEPA, US Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1999. Common Sense Approaches to Protecting Workers and the Environment: Interagency Cooperation towards Cooperative Solutions. Workshop held in Washington, DC, June 17-18 (agenda and other materials on file with author)
82. US Senate. 2001. Disapproval of Department of Labor Ergonomics Rule. Congressional Record. 147(28), pp S1831-S1888, March 6
83. Wagner WE. 2000. The triumph of technology-based standards. U Illinois Law Rev 2000(1): 83-113
84. Wiener J. 1998. Managing the iatrogenic risks of risk management. RISK: Health, Safety & Environment 9:39-82
85. Wilson JD. 1994. Promoting innovation "the easy way." In: Finkel AM and Golding D (eds), Worst Things First? The Debate Over Risk-Based National Environmental Priorities, pp 315-21. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA
86. Yukota F and Thompson K. 2004. The value of information in environmental health risk management decisions: Past, present, future. Risk Anal 24:635-50