Regulating a miracle substance : the politics of asbestos in Canada and the United States
Author(s)Hein, Gregory Allan
KeywordsAsbestos -- Law and legislation -- Canada
Asbestos -- Law and legislation -- United States
Asbestos fibers -- Safety regulations -- Canada
Asbestos fibers -- Safety regulations -- United States
Full recordShow full item record
AbstractWhile asbestos has been called a 'miracle substance' because of its unique properties, asbestos has also caused cancer in those exposed to its indestructible fibres. This mix of benefits and costs has made the regulation of asbestos particularly difficult for policymakers; in both countries, regulation has been characterized by exceptional measures.
In Canada, regulating asbestos has led to innumerable government studies, including the Ontario Royal Commission on Matters of Health and Safety Arising from the Use of Asbestos (1984). The Commission's Report was unique in its extensive scope and detail. Its three volume report included a detailed treatment of asbestos-related diseases, quantitative risk estimates, and assessments of current regulations. The regulatory history of asbestos in the US was also somewhat exceptional. It involved a protracted battle between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Office of Management and Budget. Out of this battle came a House Subcommittee investigation into OMB interference in EPA rulemaking (1985).
The comprehensiveness of the Royal Commission's Report is highly significant given that detailed scientific explanations of policy, and the criteria used to balance costs and benefits are usually not explicitly revealed by Canadian regulators. In this sense, the somewhat anomalous nature of the Commission's Report offers an especially detailed view of regulating hazardous substances in Canada. Like the Royal Commission Report, the House investigation provides an extraordinarily detailed look at the politics of regulating a hazardous substance.
Out of these involved deliberations, though, emerge very different policies on asbestos. While the US has implemented a three-stage ban, Canadian regulators view asbestos primarily as an occupational problem. The workplace standards of the US, Ontario and Quebec differ, with the US being more stringent.
The contributions of this paper stem from its balanced consideration of scientific and political determinants and its comparative nature. This balanced consideration illustrates the double impact of science. While science can set the boundaries of a policy debate, uncertain areas of scientific evidence are usually politicized by competing interests. Thus, the less science is certain, the more politics matters.
Within the boundaries set by science, various political forces have an impact on the policy process. Policies are shown to emerge from very different interrelationships between state structures and societal actors, influenced by varying degrees of economic dependence on asbestos. Group theory alone fails to explain the divergent policy outcomes; so do neo-Marxist and institutionalist approaches. Thus, this study demonstrates the superiority of integrative approaches, as opposed to those which emphasize one causal variable at the expense of others.
Arts, Faculty of
Political Science, Department of
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Workplace safety and asbestos contamination : hearing before the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, United States Senate, One Hundred Seventh Congress, first session on examining workplace safety and asbestos contamination, focusing on the combined authority and efforts of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Mine Safety and Health Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency to prescribe and enforce regulations to prevent health risks to workers from exposure to airborne asbestos, July 31, 2001.United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Washington : U.S. G.P.O. : For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., [Congressional Sales Office],, 2002)iv, 214 p. :
Asbestos Stocks and Flows Legacy in AustraliaBelinda Brown; Ian Hollins; Joe Pickin; Sally Donovan (MDPI AG, 2023-01-01)Information about asbestos stocks and flows is paramount for effective legacy management, both for understanding potential asbestos exposure risks from the different product types remaining in the built environment and proactive resource planning for their safe decommissioning, removal and disposal. This paper provides an overview of the Australian Stocks and Flows Model for Asbestos, a national model that provides best estimates to examine asbestos legacy stocks remaining in the built environment and flows to waste, now and into the future in Australia. The model was updated in 2021 to reflect new information from literature and input from industry experts and includes a Monte Carlo analysis to better reflect the range in the value estimates, as well as allowing for input of data from asbestos removal programs. Australia’s total asbestos stocks peaked at approximately 11 million tonnes in the 1980s. Over 95% of stocks comprise asbestos cement products, such as wall sheeting and water pipes. Australia’s current remaining asbestos stocks in the built environment are estimated at 6.2 million tonnes, with just under half of total consumption estimated to have gone to landfill as waste. The model can continue to be used with updated information to help track how much of Australia’s hazardous asbestos legacy is remaining and by how much it is reducing. The model can also be used to test scenarios and implications for predicted development trends and waste infrastructure needs. It is a valuable resource to assist with sustainable planning across a range of government departments that are responsible for managing asbestos waste in Australia.