IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v44y2017i5p698-706..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disrupting regulation: understanding industry engagement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals

Author

Listed:
  • Brett Aho

Abstract

Over the course of the 20th century, the chemicals industry developed various strategies to engage in regulatory processes with the apparent goal of preventing, delaying, or weakening government regulation of their products. Today, the industry continues to employ these strategies to counter efforts to regulate endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), achieving success by exploiting weaknesses and vulnerabilities in existing regulatory structures. This article asserts that industry efforts to counter the regulation of EDCs is comprised of three different forms of engagement, including (1) engagement with science, (2) engagement with the public, and (3) engagement with politics. By demonstrating how individual strategies build off each other and are combined to achieve desired policy outcomes, this article demonstrates how the chemical industry’s current strategy on EDCs follows a dynamic playbook that has been developed and improved over years of regulatory engagement.

Suggested Citation

  • Brett Aho, 2017. "Disrupting regulation: understanding industry engagement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 698-706.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:5:p:698-706.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scx004
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonardo Trasande & R. Thomas Zoeller & Ulla Hass & Andreas Kortenkamp & Philippe Grandjean & John Peterson Myers & Joseph Digangi & Martine Bellanger & Russ Hauser & Juliette Legler & Niels E. Skakke, 2015. "Estimating Burden and Disease Costs of Exposure to Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals in the European Union," Post-Print hal-01505537, HAL.
    2. Robert Brulle, 2014. "Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(4), pages 681-694, February.
    3. Vogel, S.A., 2009. "The politics of plastics: the making and unmaking of bisphenol a "safety"," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(S3), pages 559-566.
    4. Haeder, Simon F. & Yackee, Susan Webb, 2015. "Influence and the Administrative Process: Lobbying the U.S. President's Office of Management and Budget," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(3), pages 507-522, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Analena B. Bruce & Yetkin Borlu & Leland L. Glenna, 2023. "Assessing the scientific support for U.S. EPA pesticide regulatory policy governing active and inert ingredients," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Mikael Karlsson, 2019. "Chemicals Denial—A Challenge to Science and Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-9, September.
    3. Susan L. Prescott & Alan C. Logan, 2018. "Larger Than Life: Injecting Hope into the Planetary Health Paradigm," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-27, March.
    4. Glenna, Leland & Bruce, Analena, 2021. "Suborning science for profit: Monsanto, glyphosate, and private science research misconduct," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kertcher, Zack & Venkatraman, Rohan & Coslor, Erica, 2020. "Pleasingly parallel: Early cross-disciplinary work for innovation diffusion across boundaries in grid computing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 581-594.
    2. Peter Frumhoff & Richard Heede & Naomi Oreskes, 2015. "The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 157-171, September.
    3. Mireille Chiroleu‐Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2020. "Merchants of doubt: Corporate political action when NGO credibility is uncertain," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 439-461, April.
    4. Jeremiah Bohr, 2017. "Is it hot in here or is it just me? Temperature anomalies and political polarization over global warming in the American public," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 271-285, May.
    5. Hamish van der Ven & Yixian Sun, 2021. "Varieties of Crises: Comparing the Politics of COVID-19 and Climate Change," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 13-22, Winter.
    6. Oliver Lazarus & Sonali McDermid & Jennifer Jacquet, 2021. "The climate responsibilities of industrial meat and dairy producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Francesca Gorini & Elisa Bustaffa & Alessio Coi & Giorgio Iervasi & Fabrizio Bianchi, 2020. "Bisphenols as Environmental Triggers of Thyroid Dysfunction: Clues and Evidence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-46, April.
    8. Sam Crawley & Hilde Coffé & Ralph Chapman, 2022. "Climate Belief and Issue Salience: Comparing Two Dimensions of Public Opinion on Climate Change in the EU," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 307-325, July.
    9. Saatvika Rai, 2020. "Policy Adoption and Policy Intensity: Emergence of Climate Adaptation Planning in U.S. States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 444-463, July.
    10. Stephen Fox & Janne Kauttio & Yusuf Mubarak & Hannu Niemisto, 2017. "Determinants in Competition between Cross-Sector Alliances," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, August.
    11. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2020. "Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. Ragnar Lofstedt, 2013. "Communicating Food Risks in an Era of Growing Public Distrust: Three Case Studies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 192-202, February.
    13. Sugandha Srivastav & Ryan Rafaty, 2023. "Political Strategies to Overcome Climate Policy Obstructionism," Papers 2304.14960, arXiv.org.
    14. Jelonia T. Rumph & Victoria R. Stephens & Joanie L. Martin & LaKendria K. Brown & Portia L. Thomas & Ayorinde Cooley & Kevin G. Osteen & Kaylon L. Bruner-Tran, 2022. "Uncovering Evidence: Associations between Environmental Contaminants and Disparities in Women’s Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-22, January.
    15. Joost Moor, 2022. "Prioritizing adaptation and mitigation in the climate movement: evidence from a cross-national protest survey of the Global Climate Strike, 2019," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Ötsch, Walter & Pühringer, Stephan, 2019. "The anti-democratic logic of right-wing populism and neoliberal market-fundamentalism," Working Paper Series Ök-48, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    17. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    18. Daniel Slunge & Francisco Alpizar, 2019. "Market-Based Instruments for Managing Hazardous Chemicals: A Review of the Literature and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    19. Plehwe, Dieter, 2021. "Think tanks and the politics of climate change," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 150-165.
    20. Srivastav, Sugandha & Rafaty, Ryan, 2021. "Five Worlds of Political Strategy in the Climate Movement," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-07, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.

    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:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:5:p:698-706.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.