Managing Technological Risks: U.S. and Japanese Approaches
Abstract
Over the past two decades, concerns for the societal impacts- whether realized or potential- created by the adoption and application of technologies has both widened and deepened in most industrialized societies. This trend mirrors sharpening public concerns over the risks to human health and safety posed by technological hazards.
This paper is a preliminary report on a study sponsored by the National Science Foundation to conduct a comparative analysis of how technological risks are being managed in the United States and Japan. This paper examines one of the four case areas, airborne lead, which the study is currently investigating and outlines similarities and differences in the way both countries are managing risks.
Key Words
Risk Management Comparative Analysis U.S. Japan Airborne LeadPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Scoping Paper, “Managing Technological Risks: A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Approaches,” Vanderbilt University, January 5, 1984 (unpublished memo).Google Scholar
- 2.Mark Boroush, “Suggested Criteria for Case Study Selection,” The Futures Group, September 12, 1983 (unpublished working paper).Google Scholar
- 3.
- 4.New York Times, May 28, 1984, p. A15.Google Scholar
- 5.J.F. Gilaim, “Estimates of the Nature & Extent of Lead Paint Poisoning in the United States,” National Bureau of Standards Technical Note 746, 1972.Google Scholar
- 6.Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Criteria for Lead, EPA–600/8–77–017, pp. 12–15.Google Scholar
- 7.Environmental Review Cases, 8, 1975, p. 1353.Google Scholar
- 8.Federal Register 46247, October 5, 1978.Google Scholar
- 9.Communication with Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., Washington, D.C., April, 1984.Google Scholar