Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO
Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO
Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Transn<strong>at</strong>ional Coalitions 41<br />
them of deforming babies or killing motorists), and associ<strong>at</strong>e the legisl<strong>at</strong>ion<br />
with widely shared values (clear air, pure w<strong>at</strong>er, he<strong>at</strong>h, and safety)”<br />
(ibid., p. 370). Transn<strong>at</strong>ional coalitions of entrepreneurs similarly seek<br />
through campaigning to focus <strong>at</strong>tention on societal problems, mobilize<br />
intern<strong>at</strong>ional public and political support, and pressure governments to<br />
adopt more environment-friendly policies. They politically construct targeted<br />
problems as intern<strong>at</strong>ional public “bads.”<br />
Several studies stress the importance of the concern for society’s best<br />
interest when new domestic environmental policies are initi<strong>at</strong>ed. Based on<br />
the findings from a collection of case studies in regul<strong>at</strong>ory and environmental<br />
policy making, Wilson (ibid., p. 372) has concluded th<strong>at</strong> “only by<br />
the most extraordinary theoretical contortions can one explain the Auto<br />
Safety Act, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the [Occup<strong>at</strong>ional Safety and Health<br />
Act], or most environmental protection laws by reference to the economic<br />
stakes involved.” In the same way, with regard to health, safety, and environmental<br />
regul<strong>at</strong>ory programs from the 1960s and the early 1970s in the<br />
United St<strong>at</strong>es, Kelman (1990, p. 40) argues th<strong>at</strong> “these programs were<br />
adopted against the wishes of well-organized producers, to benefit poorly<br />
organized consumers and environmentalists.” 15 Similarly, Reich (1990, p.<br />
4) notes th<strong>at</strong> many of the United St<strong>at</strong>es’ environmental policies from the<br />
1960s “have not been motiv<strong>at</strong>ed principally or even substantially by individuals<br />
seeking to s<strong>at</strong>isfy selfish interests. To the contrary, they have been<br />
broadly understood as m<strong>at</strong>ters of public, r<strong>at</strong>her than priv<strong>at</strong>e, interest. . . .<br />
People have supported these initi<strong>at</strong>ives largely because they were thought<br />
to be good for society.” According to these analysts, regul<strong>at</strong>ory and environmental<br />
initi<strong>at</strong>ives are in many instances intended to benefit society <strong>at</strong><br />
large, not just individual groups. Widely accepted ideas, values, and perceptions,<br />
distinguishable from economic interests and group preferences,<br />
seem to play an important role in initi<strong>at</strong>ing environmental policy by shaping<br />
society’s perception of how the collective interest is best served.<br />
Policy entrepreneurs advoc<strong>at</strong>e ideas and spread images and metaphors<br />
th<strong>at</strong> highlight the need for environmental protection and clearly identify<br />
the targeted problem. But an idea will often be resisted for political, economic,<br />
and institutional reasons. 16 Also, a new and emerging idea, as it is<br />
not yet clearly defined and is <strong>at</strong> an early stage of development, might be<br />
conceptually or scientifically weak. At other times an idea might be resisted<br />
simply because it is new. Deb<strong>at</strong>e and persuasion are consequently needed in