Managing Environmental Risks

  • Lester B. Lave
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis book series (CIRA, volume 3)


A world with acute health problems, economic depression, war or the threat of nuclear annihilation, and high injury rates is not one where environmental issues are likely to be the focus of attention. Only when short-term health problems are under control, income is at a high level, and other immediate threats such as war are viewed as being under control is the environment likely to emerge as a major social concern (Lave, 1980a). The late 1960s was such a time in the United States and in much of the developed world. Spectacular progress had been made in lowering the infant mortality rate and vanquishing infectious disease. Trauma was viewed as basically being under control, due in part to the creation of the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The perceived threat of nuclear war had receded far from the preoccupation of the early 1950s. Per capita income had increased steadily in the post-war period and fears of a deep depression had evaporated with the steady performance of the economy over two and a half decades. In short, immediate, high-level concerns had been satisfied and other issues might emerge to take their place.


Risk Analysis Risk Management Environmental Protection Agency Brookings Institution Reagan Administration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ackerman, B., and Hassler, W., 1981, Clean Coal, Dirty Air ,Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  2. American Bar Association, 1979, Federal Regulation: Roads to Reform, Final Report and Recommendations of the Commission on Law and the Economy ,American Bar Association, New York.Google Scholar
  3. American Enterprise Institute, 1979, Government Regulation: Proposals for Procedural Reform ,American Enterprise Institute, Washington.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, E., and the Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, Quantitative approaches in use to assess cancer risks, Risk Anal. 3:277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrd, D., and Lave, L., 1987, Significant risk is not the antonym of de minimis risk, in: De Minimis Risk, Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis ,Vol. 2 (C. Whipple, ed.), pp. 41–60, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Carson, R., 1962, Silent Spring ,Houghton-Mifflin, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, B., 1985, Risks in our society, in: Nuclear Energy: A Sensible Alternative (K. Ott and B. Spinrad, eds.), pp. 317–325, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Council on Environmental Quality, 1980, The Global 2000 Report to the President: Entering the 21st Century, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington.Google Scholar
  9. Crandall, R., 1983, Controlling Industrial Pollution: The Economics and Politics of Clean Air ,Brookings Institution, Washington.Google Scholar
  10. Doll, R., and Peto, R., 1981, The Causes of Cancer ,Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Fischhoff,- B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Darby, S., and Keeny, R., 1981, Acceptable Risk ,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Lash, J., Gillman, K., and Sheridan, D., 1984, A Season of Spoils: The Story of the Reagan Administration’s Attack on the Environment ,Pantheon, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Lave, L., 1980a, Environmental risks, in: Societal Risk Analysis: How Safe is Safe Enough (R. Schwing and W. Albers, eds.), Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Lave, L., 1980b, Health, safety, and environmental regulation, in: Setting National Priorities: Agenda for the 1980s (J. Pechman, ed.), pp. 131–168, Brookings Institution, Washington.Google Scholar
  15. Lave, L., 1981, The Strategy of Social Regulation ,Brookings Institution, Washington.Google Scholar
  16. Lave, L., 1982, Quantitative Risk Assessment in Regulation, Brookings Institution ,Washington.Google Scholar
  17. Levy, R., 1981, The decline in cardiovascular disease mortality, Ann. Rev. Public Health ,2:49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Melnick, R., 1983, Regulation and the Courts: The Case of the Clean Air Act ,Brookings Institution, Washington.Google Scholar
  19. Mendeloff, J., 1979, Regulating Safety: An Economic and Political Analysis of Occupational Safety and Health Policy ,MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  20. Milvy, P., 1986, A general guideline for management of risk from carcinogens, Risk Anal. 6:69–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Milvy, P., 1987, Actual and perceived risks from chemical carcinogens, in: De Minimis Risk: Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis ,Vol. 2 (C. Whipple, ed.), pp. 75–86, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Nader, R., 1965, Unsafe at Any Speed ,Grossman, New York.Google Scholar
  23. National Cancer Institute (NCI), 1987, Cancer Goals for 2000 ,Department of Health and Human Services, Washington.Google Scholar
  24. National Research Council (NRC), Committee for a Study on Saccharin and Food Safety Policy, 1979, Food Safety Policy ,National Academy Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  25. Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1984, Chemical carcinogens: Notice of review of the science and its associated principles, Fed. Regist. 49(100):21593-21661, (Books 1 and 2, May 22, 1984).Google Scholar
  26. Office of Technology Assessment, 1981, Assessment of Technologies of Determining Cancer Risks from the Environment ,U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Washington.Google Scholar
  27. Omenn, G., 1982, Predictive identification of hypersensitive individuals, J. Occup. Med. 24:369–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pashigian, B., 1985, Environmental regulation: Whose self-interests are being protected? Econ. Inq. ,23:551– 584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peltzman, S., 1983, An Economic Interpretation of the History of Congressional Voting in the Twentieth Century ,University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  30. Shelling, T., 1968, The life you save may be your own, in: Problems in Public Expenditure Analysis (S. Chase, ed.), pp. 127–161, Brookings Institution, Washington.Google Scholar
  31. Simon, J., and Kahn, H., 1984, The Resourceful Earth: A Response to Global 2000 ,Blackwell, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Supreme Court of the United States, 1980, Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute ,448 U.S. 607.Google Scholar
  33. Weidenbaum, M., and de Fina, R., 1978, The Cost of Federal Regulation of Economic Activity ,American Enterprise Institute, Washington.Google Scholar
  34. Whelan, E., 1985, Toxic Terror: The Truth About the Cancer Scare ,Jameson Books, Ottawa, Illinois.Google Scholar
  35. Whipple, C. (ed.), 1987, De Minimis Risk: Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis ,Vol. 2, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  36. Wildavsky, A., 1979, No risk is the highest risk of all, Am. Sci. 67:32–37.Google Scholar
  37. Wilson, J., 1980, The Politics of Regulation ,Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Zeckhauser, R., and Shepard, D., 1976, Where now for saving lives? Law Contemp. Prob. ,40:5–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References for table 2

  1. 1.
    Suta, B., Assessment of Human Exposures to Atmospheric Ethylene Dichloride ,SRI International (May 1979).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    EPA, Office of Policy Analysis, Unit Risk Estimates For Toxic Air Pollution ,Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Maximum Exposure Levels and Population Totals (1984).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    EPA, Lindane PD-4 (draft) (August 1983).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson, E. L., “Quantitative Approaches in Use to Assess Cancer Risk,” Risk Analysis 3 ,No. 4, 277–295 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cothern, R. C., et al., Development of Quantitative Estimates of Uncertainty in Environmental Risk Assessment When the Scientific Data Base is Inadequate (Draft), Office of Drinking Water, EPA, Wash ington, D.C.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bussard, D., Memorandum dated 3/15/84, EPA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gorman, T., NESHAP briefing paper, OPPE, EPA (1984).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Office of Air Quality and Standards, Need for Regulation of Coke Oven Emissions and Acrylonitrile Under CAA ,briefing paper, EPA, Washington, D.C. (March 1984).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dobkowski, D., Memorandum to A. Jennings dated 4/3/84, Acting Director Statistical Policy Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chemical Coordination Staff for the Six Month Air Toxics Study “Acceptable Risk Levels and Federal Regulations . . .,” EPA, Washington, D.C. (May 1984).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haemisegger, E., Jones, A., et al, The Air Toxics Problem in the United States: An Analysis of Cancer Risks for Selected Pollutants ,EPA (Final Agency Internal Review); Washington, D.C. (May 1985).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kumazawa, S. et al., Occupational Exposure to Ionizing Radiation in the United States ,EPA, Washington, D.C. (March 1983).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Britton, B., Risk Characteristics for Various Pollutants Regulated or Being Considered by EPA Program Offices ,Chemical and Statistical Policy Division, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1985).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Milvy, P., Estimates of Cancers from Perchloroethylene (PCE) Exposure (4/3/84) and Health Assessment Document for Tetrachloraethylene ,EPA, Washington, D.C. (December 1983).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    EPA-OHEA, Health Assessment Document for Chromium, 7/83 draft.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Office of Radiation Programs, Background Information; Final Rules for Radionuclides ,11 (October 23, 1982).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    EPA, Draft Alachlor PD-1 (12/4/84), 54.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    EPA, Draft Captan PD-2/3 (2/5/85), 11–68.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    EPA, Captofol PD-1 (December 1984).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, Assessment of Cancer Risk to Workers, Exposure to 1,3-Butadiene in Plants Producing Synthetic Rubber, Plastics and Resins (November 21, 1984).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Preliminary Economic Analysis of Proposed Regulations for the Use of Nitrites in Metalworking Fluids; PHD, Inc. (October 1984).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    EPA registration standard, 21 (June 1984).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    EPA, Preliminary Folpet Risk Assessment Briefing Paper for S.I.S., OPP (1985).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    EPA, Regulatory Impact Analysis, Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis for Proposed Regulations to Control Volatile Synthetic Organic Chemicals (VOCs) in Drinking Water (EPA -570/9-85-004) (Calculated from pages 1–5 and IV-8) (May 1985).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs Position Document 2/3 on Wood Preservatives, 364, 582, 589 (1984).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cothern, R. C., Coniglio, W. A., and Marcus, W. L., Techniques for the Assessment of the Carcinogenic Risk to the U.S. Population Due to Exposure from Selected Volatile Organic Compounds from Drinking Water Via the Ingestion, Inhalation, and Dermal Routes (EPA-570/9-85-001) (July 25, 1984). (Calculations based on the multistage model for extrapolation of risk to low dose).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nero, A. V., Jr., “Risk and Policy Implications of Indoor Exposure to 222Rn Decay Products and Other Air Pollutants.” Paper presented at the 1985 Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, Alexandria, Va.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lester B. Lave
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Industrial AdministrationCarnegie-Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations