IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i2p198-d128600.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Asbestos Ban in Korea from a Grassroots Perspective: Why Did It Occur?

Author

Listed:
  • Yu-Ryong Yoon

    (Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea)

  • Kyeong Min Kwak

    (Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea
    Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon 21565, Korea)

  • Yeyong Choi

    (Asia Citizen’s Center for Environment and Health, Seoul 03184, Korea)

  • Kanwoo Youn

    (Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Wonjin Green Hospital, Seoul 02228, Korea)

  • Jinwook Bahk

    (Department of Public Health, Keimyung University, Daegu 42601, Korea)

  • Dong-Mug Kang

    (Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan 50612, Korea)

  • Domyung Paek

    (Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea
    Institute of Health and Environment, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea)

Abstract

In 2009, asbestos was finally banned in Korea, about 70 years after the first opening of asbestos mines under Japanese control. After having presented the history of asbestos industry, together with its regulations and health effects over time, we constructed narrative analyses of how the asbestos issue under the prevailing risk system was managed by whom and for what purpose, to provide context for the change. We could identify five different phases: laissez-faire, politico-technical, economic–managerial, health-oriented cultural, and human rights-based post-cultural risk systems. The changes leading to the asbestos ban evolved over different phases, and each phase change was necessary to reach the final ban, in that, without resolving the previous issues by examining different categories of potential alternatives, either the final ban was not possible or, even if instituted, could not be sustained. An asbestos ban could be introduced when all the alternatives to these issues, including legitimate political windows, economic rationalizations, health risk protections, and human rights sensitivities, were available. We think the alternatives that we had were not in perfect shape, but in more or less loosely connected forms, and hence we had to know how to build solidarities between different stakeholders to compensate for the imperfections.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu-Ryong Yoon & Kyeong Min Kwak & Yeyong Choi & Kanwoo Youn & Jinwook Bahk & Dong-Mug Kang & Domyung Paek, 2018. "The Asbestos Ban in Korea from a Grassroots Perspective: Why Did It Occur?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-12, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:2:p:198-:d:128600
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/2/198/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/2/198/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seungho Lee & Dongmug Kang & Youngki Kim & Yoon-Ji Kim & Se-Yeong Kim, 2021. "Activity-Based Exposure Levels and Cancer Risk Assessment Due to Naturally Occurring Asbestos for the Residents Near Abandoned Asbestos Mines in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-12, May.
    2. Jiwoon Kwon, 2022. "Impact of Naturally Occurring Asbestos on Asbestos Ban: Regulations and Experience of the Republic of Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-12, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:2:p:198-:d:128600. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.