Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Better Ways to Study Regulatory Elephants

  • Jonathan B. Wiener (a1), Brendon Swedlow (a2), James K. Hammitt (a3), Michael D. Rogers (a4) and Peter H. Sand (a5)...
  • In response to commentaries on:

Abstract

  • An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided below. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Copyright

References

Hide All

1 Vogel, David, The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012).

2 Wiener, Jonathan B., Rogers, Michael D., Hammitt, James K., and Sand, Peter H. (eds), The Reality of Precaution: Comparing Risk Regulation in the United States and Europe (Washington, D.C. and London: RFF Press/Earthscan/Routledge, 2011).

3 Weimer, Maria, “‘It's the Politics, Stupid’, Or is the Reality more Complex?”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (2013), this issue.

4 Vogel, David, “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (2013), this issue.

5 Rose–Ackerman, Susan, “Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis: False Analogies”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (2013), this issue.

6 Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, Chapter 20.

7 Cafaggi, Fabrizio, Book Review of The Reality of Precaution: Comparing Risk Regulation in the United States and Europe, 2(3) European Journal of Risk Regulation (2012), pp. 265272.

8 Rose–Ackerman, “Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis”, supra note 5.

9 Burgess, Adam, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (2013), this issue.

10 Winn, Jane K., “Precautionary Schemes”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (2013), this issue.

11 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9; Durodié, Bill, “Precautionary Tales – Missing the Problem and Its Cause”, European Journal of Risk Regulation, this issue.

12 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

13 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9.

14 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

15 E.g. Rose–Ackerman, “Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis”, supra note 5.

16 Weimer, “‘It's the Politics, Stupid’”, supra note 3.

17 See Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, Chapter 20.

18 See Jonathan B. Wiener, “Whose Precaution After All? A Comment on the Comparison and Evolution of Risk Regulatory Systems”, 13 Duke Journal of International and Comparative Law (2003), pp. 207–262; and Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, Chapter 1 “The Rhetoric of Precaution”.

19 Zweigert, Konrad and Kötz, Hein, An Introduction to Comparative Law, 3rd ed., Trans. Tony Weir (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).

20 Porta, Rafael La, Lopez–de–Silanes, Florencio, and Shleifer, Andrei, “The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins”, 46 Journal of Economic Literature (2008), pp. 435452.

21 Vogel, David, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, 7(2) Regulation & Governance (2013), pp. 271277; Vogel, “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, supra note 4.

22 Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1, pp. 289–290.

23 Vogel, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, supra note 21; Vogel, “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, supra note 4.

24 Brendon Swedlow, Denise Kall, Zheng Zhou, James K. Hammitt, and Jonathan B. Wiener, “A Quantitative Comparison of Relative Precaution in the United States and Europe, 1970–2004”, in Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, pp. 377–408.

25 Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1.

26 Ibid, p. 5.

27 Ibid, p. 2.

28 Ibid, p. 5.

29 Ibid, p. 4 (footnotes omitted).

30 Ibid, p. 9.

31 Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2.

32 Swedlow, Kall, Zhou et al., “A Quantitative Comparison of Relative Precaution in the United States and Europe, 1970–2004”, supra note 24.

33 See also Hammitt, James K., Wiener, Jonathan B., Swedlow, Brendon, Kall, Denise, and Zhou, Zheng, “Precautionary Regulation in Europe and in the United States: A Quantitative Comparison”, 25(5) Risk Analysis (2005), pp. 12151228 ; Swedlow, Brendon, Kall, Denise, Zhou, Zheng, Hammitt, James K., and Wiener, Jonathan B, “Theorizing and Generalizing about Risk Assessment and Regulation through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases”, 31 Law and Policy (2009), pp. 236269.

34 Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1.

35 For comments on Vogel's attempts to explain his claimed shift, see Wiener, Jonathan B., “The Politics of Precaution, and the Reality” , 7(2) Regulation & Governance (2013), pp. 258265.

36 See Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, chapter 20; Wiener, Jonathan B., “The Diffusion of Regulatory Oversight”, in Michael A. Livermore and Richard L. Revesz (eds), The Globalization of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Environmental Policy (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 123141.

37 For other examples of this pathology of catchy but faulty generalizations in research and public discourse, see Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, chapter 1.

38 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

39 Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1.

40 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9.

41 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

42 David Vogel, “Ships Passing in the Night: The Changing Politics of Risk Regulation in Europe and the United States”, Working Paper 2001/16, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, available on the Internet at <http://www.eui.eu/RSCAS/WP-Texts/01_16.pdf> (last accessed on 18 April 2013); Vogel, David, “The Hare and the Tortoise Revisited: The New Politics of Consumer and Environmental Regulation in Europe”, 33 British Journal of Political Science (2003), pp. 557580; Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1.

43 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

44 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9.

45 Durodié, “Precautionary Tales”, supra note 11.

46 See King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney, Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994) on drawing inferences from case studies. For application of these standards to studies of regulation see Mazur, Allan, True Warnings and False Alarms: Evaluating Fears about the Health Risks of Technology, 1948–1971 (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2004) and Swedlow, Brendon, “Review of Allan Mazur's ‘True Warnings and False Alarms: Evaluating Fears about the Health Risks of Technology, 1948–1971”, 8(4) Environmental Science and Policy (2005), pp. 236269.

47 Vogel, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, supra note 21.

48 Sand, Peter H., “The Precautionary Principle: A European Perspective”, 6 Human and Ecological Risk Assessment (2000), pp. 445 458; Zander, Joakim, The Application of the Precautionary Principle in Practice: Comparative Dimensions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).

49 See Swedlow, Kall, Zhou et al., “Theorizing and Generalizing about Risk Assessment and Regulation through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases”, supra note 33; Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, chapter 15.

50 Winn, “Precautionary Schemes”, supra note 10.

51 Weimer, “‘It's the Politics, Stupid’”, supra note 3.

52 Vogel, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, supra note 21; Vogel, “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, supra note 4.

53 Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1, on p. 18.

54 Vogel, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, supra note 21.

55 Ibid; see also Vogel, The Politics of Precaution, supra note 1, p. 4.

56 Wiener, “The Politics of Precaution, and the Reality”, supra note 35.

57 See Table 15.2 in Swedlow, Kall, Zhou et al., “A Quantitative Comparison of Relative Precaution in the United States and Europe, 1970–2004”, supra note 24.

58 Vogel , “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, supra note 4.

59 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9.

60 Vogel, David, National Styles of Regulation: Environmental Policy in Great Britain and the United States (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986).

61 Zweigert and Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law, supra note 19; La Porta, Lopez–de–Silanes and Shleifer, “The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins”, supra note 20.

62 Kelemen, R. Daniel, “Commentary on Vogel's The Politics of Precaution7(2) Regulation & Governance (2013), pp. 266270; Wiener, “The Politics of Precaution, and the Reality”, supra note 35.

63 Vogel, “Response to Jonathan B. Wiener and R. Daniel Kelemen”, supra note 21.

64 Weimer, “‘It's the Politics, Stupid’”, supra note 3.

65 Swedlow, Kall, Zhou et al, “Theorizing and Generalizing about Risk Assessment and Regulation through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases”, supra note 33.

66 Lieberman, Evan S., “Nested Analysis as a Mixed–Method Strategy for Comparative Research”, 99 American Political Science Review (2005), pp. 435452.

67 Vogel, “A More Sophisticated Understanding of the Politics of Precaution”, supra note 4.

68 Rose–Ackerman, “Precaution, Proportionality, and Cost/Benefit Analysis: False Analogies”, supra note 5.

69 Wiener, Rogers, Hammitt and Sand, The Reality of Precaution, supra note 2, chapter 20.

70 Burgess, “Missing the Wood for the Trees”, supra note 9.

71 Durodié, “Precautionary Tales”, supra note 11.

Better Ways to Study Regulatory Elephants

  • Jonathan B. Wiener (a1), Brendon Swedlow (a2), James K. Hammitt (a3), Michael D. Rogers (a4) and Peter H. Sand (a5)...
  • In response to commentaries on:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed