Risk Regulation and Administrative Constitutionalism

Β· Bloomsbury Publishing
5.0
αž€αžΆαžšαžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒ 1
αžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…β€‹αž’αŸαž‘αž·αž…αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαž“αž·αž…
256
αž‘αŸ†αž–αŸαžš
αž€αžΆαžšαžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒ αž“αž·αž„αž˜αžαž·αžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒαž˜αž·αž“αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαžœαž”αžΆαž“αž•αŸ’αž‘αŸ€αž„αž•αŸ’αž‘αžΆαžαŸ‹αž‘αŸ αžŸαŸ’αžœαŸ‚αž„αž™αž›αŸ‹αž”αž“αŸ’αžαŸ‚αž˜

αž’αŸ†αž–αžΈαžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…β€‹αž’αŸαž‘αž·αž…αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαž“αž·αž€αž“αŸαŸ‡

Over the last decade the regulatory evaluation of environmental and public health risks has been one of the most legally controversial areas of contemporary government activity. Much of that debate has been understood as a conflict between those promoting 'scientific' approaches to risk evaluation and those promoting 'democratic' approaches. This characterization of disputes has ignored the central roles of public administration and law in technological risk evaluation. This is problematic because, as shown in this book, legal disputes over risk evaluation are disputes over administrative constitutionalism in that they are disputes over what role law should play in constituting and limiting the power of administrative risk regulators. This is shown by five case studies taken from five different legal cultures: an analysis of the bifurcated role of the Southwood Working Party in the UK BSE crisis; the development of doctrines in relation to judicial review of risk evaluation in the US in the 1970s; the interpretation of the precautionary principle by environmental courts and generalist tribunals carrying out merits review in Australia; the interpretation of the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement as part of the WTO dispute settlement process; and the interpretation of the precautionary principle in the EU context. A strong argument is thus made for re-orienting the focus of scholarship in this area.

αž€αžΆαžšαžŠαžΆαž€αŸ‹αž•αŸ’αž€αžΆαž™ αž“αž·αž„αž˜αžαž·αžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒ

5.0
αž€αžΆαžšαžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒ 1

αž’αŸ†αž–αžΈβ€‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αž“αž·αž–αž“αŸ’αž’

Elizabeth Fisher is a Reader in Environmental Law at the University of Oxford and Tutor in Law at Corpus Christi College, Oxford.

αžœαžΆαž™αžαž˜αŸ’αž›αŸƒαžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…β€‹αž’αŸαž‘αž·αž…αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαž“αž·αž€αž“αŸαŸ‡

αž”αŸ’αžšαžΆαž”αŸ‹αž™αžΎαž„αž’αŸ†αž–αžΈαž€αžΆαžšαž™αž›αŸ‹αžƒαžΎαž‰αžšαž”αžŸαŸ‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αŸ”

αž’αžΆαž“β€‹αž–αŸαžαŸŒαž˜αžΆαž“

αž‘αžΌαžšαžŸαž–αŸ’αž‘αž†αŸ’αž›αžΆαžαžœαŸƒ αž“αž·αž„β€‹αžαŸαž”αŸ’αž›αŸαž
αžŠαŸ†αž‘αžΎαž„αž€αž˜αŸ’αž˜αžœαž·αž’αžΈ Google Play Books αžŸαž˜αŸ’αžšαžΆαž”αŸ‹ Android αž“αž·αž„ iPad/iPhone αŸ” αžœαžΆβ€‹αž’αŸ’αžœαžΎαžŸαž˜αž€αžΆαž›αž€αž˜αŸ’αž˜β€‹αžŠαŸ„αž™αžŸαŸ’αžœαŸαž™αž”αŸ’αžšαžœαžαŸ’αžαž·αž‡αžΆαž˜αž½αž™β€‹αž‚αžŽαž“αžΈβ€‹αžšαž”αžŸαŸ‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€β€‹ αž“αž·αž„β€‹αž’αž“αž»αž‰αŸ’αž‰αžΆαžαž±αŸ’αž™β€‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αž’αžΆαž“αž–αŸαž›β€‹αž˜αžΆαž“αž’αŸŠαžΈαž“αž’αžΊαžŽαž·αž αž¬αž‚αŸ’αž˜αžΆαž“β€‹αž’αŸŠαžΈαž“αž’αžΊαžŽαž·αžβ€‹αž“αŸ…αž‚αŸ’αžšαž”αŸ‹αž‘αžΈαž€αž“αŸ’αž›αŸ‚αž„αŸ”
αž€αž»αŸ†αž–αŸ’αž™αžΌαž‘αŸαžšβ€‹αž™αž½αžšαžŠαŸƒ αž“αž·αž„αž€αž»αŸ†αž–αŸ’αž™αžΌαž‘αŸαžš
αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αž’αžΆαž…αžŸαŸ’αžŠαžΆαž”αŸ‹αžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…αž‡αžΆαžŸαŸ†αž‘αŸαž„αžŠαŸ‚αž›αž”αžΆαž“αž‘αž·αž‰αž“αŸ…αž€αŸ’αž“αž»αž„ Google Play αžŠαŸ„αž™αž”αŸ’αžšαžΎαž€αž˜αŸ’αž˜αžœαž·αž’αžΈαžšαž»αž€αžšαž€αžαžΆαž˜αž’αŸŠαžΈαž“αž’αžΊαžŽαž·αžαž€αŸ’αž“αž»αž„αž€αž»αŸ†αž–αŸ’αž™αžΌαž‘αŸαžšαžšαž”αžŸαŸ‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αŸ”
eReaders αž“αž·αž„β€‹αž§αž”αž€αžšαžŽαŸβ€‹αž•αŸ’αžŸαŸαž„β€‹αž‘αŸ€αž
αžŠαžΎαž˜αŸ’αž”αžΈαž’αžΆαž“αž“αŸ…αž›αžΎβ€‹αž§αž”αž€αžšαžŽαŸ e-ink αžŠαžΌαž…αž‡αžΆβ€‹αž§αž”αž€αžšαžŽαŸαž’αžΆαž“β€‹αžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…αž’αŸαž‘αž·αž…αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαž“αž·αž€ Kobo αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αž“αžΉαž„αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαžœβ€‹αž‘αžΆαž‰αž™αž€β€‹αž―αž€αžŸαžΆαžš αž αžΎαž™β€‹αž•αŸ’αž‘αŸαžšαžœαžΆαž‘αŸ…β€‹αž§αž”αž€αžšαžŽαŸβ€‹αžšαž”αžŸαŸ‹αž’αŸ’αž“αž€αŸ” αžŸαžΌαž˜αž’αž“αž»αžœαžαŸ’αžαžαžΆαž˜β€‹αž€αžΆαžšαžŽαŸ‚αž“αžΆαŸ†αž›αž˜αŸ’αž’αž·αžαžšαž”αžŸαŸ‹αž˜αž‡αŸ’αžˆαž˜αžŽαŸ’αžŒαž›αž‡αŸ†αž“αž½αž™ αžŠαžΎαž˜αŸ’αž”αžΈαž•αŸ’αž‘αŸαžšαž―αž€αžŸαžΆαžšβ€‹αž‘αŸ…αž§αž”αž€αžšαžŽαŸαž’αžΆαž“αžŸαŸ€αžœαž—αŸ…β€‹αž’αŸαž‘αž·αž…αžαŸ’αžšαžΌαž“αž·αž€αžŠαŸ‚αž›αžŸαŸ’αž‚αžΆαž›αŸ‹αŸ”