George Hoberg – författare

Vast changes in U.S. environmental policy from the New Deal through the Reagan administration have occurred that shed light on the nature of the American regulatory state. This book focuses on the sweeping transformation of regulatory policymaking that took place around 1970. The rise of social regulation and the advent of public interest movement during the 1960s and 1970s led to a significant change in policy outcomes, as the influence of governmental actors and political activists increased at the expense of business. By homing in on two specific areas, pesticide regulation and air pollution control, this study attempts to describe and explain these changes.This book is distinguished by its explanation of the transformation to the new system, its understanding of the way the new regulatory arrangements affect policy outcomes, and, most important, its explicit consideration of recent controversies in empirical political theory. The results provide an assessment of both the strengths and the weaknesses of the new institutionalism as a theoretical approach to studying domestic public policy in the United States. The regime framework developed here is designed to emphasize the multiplicity of forces behind public policy. This volume will be of interest to students of the American policy process, environmental policy and regulation, and theories of the American state, in academia, government, and the environmental policy community.

Paying particular attention to how politicians and bureaucrats in the two countries deal with the scientific uncertainty that pervades environmental decision making, Harrison and Hoberg analyse case studies of seven controversial substances suspected of causing cancer in humans: the pesticides Alar and alachlor, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation, radon gas, dioxin, saccharin, and asbestos. They weigh the strengths and weaknesses of each country''s approach according to five criteria: stringency and timeliness of the regulatory decision, balancing of risks and benefits by decision makers, opportunities for public participation, and the interpretation of science in regulatory decision making. The Canadian approach is exemplified by closed decision making, case-by-case review that relies heavily on expert judgement, and limited public debate about the scientific basis of regulatory decisions. In contrast, regulatory science in the United States is characterized by publication of lengthy rationales for regulatory decisions, reliance on standardized procedures for risk assessment, and controversy surrounding the interpretation of scientific evidence.

The book''s primary aim is to determine whether Canada and the United States have become more similar as their economies have become more integrated and their societies more diverse. The authors conclude that, although powerful economic and social pressures clearly constrain national governments and lead to convergence in some areas, distinctive cultural and political processes preserve room for distinctive national responses to important problems of the late twentieth century. Authors include Keith Banting, Paul Boothe (University of Alberta), Marsha Chandler (University of Toronto), George Hoberg, Robert Howse (University of Toronto), Christopher Manfredi (McGill University), George Perlin (Queen''s University), Douglas Purvis (Queen''s University), Richard Simeon, and Elaine Willis (consultant, Toronto).

In recent years, the forests of British Columbia have become a battleground for sustainable resource development. The conflicts are ever present, usually pitting environmentalists against the forest industry and forestry workers and communities. In an effort to broker peace in the woods, British Columbia's NDP government launched a number of promising new forest policy initiatives in the 1990s. In Search of Sustainability brings together a group of political scientists to examine this extraordinary burst of policy activism. Focusing on how much change has occurred and why, the authors examine seven components of BC forest policy: land use, forest practices, tenure, Aboriginal issues, timber supply, pricing, and jobs.