Trade-Offs by Whom for Whom? A Response to Calow
Sponsor
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (grant no. 0966376: “Sustaining ecosystem services to support rapidly urbanizing regions”).
Published In
BioScience
Document Type
Citation
Publication Date
12-1-2019
Abstract
We welcome Calow's (2019) critique of our recent manuscript (Chiapella et al. 2019) and the opportunity to elaborate a few key points. Calow's argument that governance must come to terms with trade-offs between health risks and “benefits from industrial and agrichemicals and pharmaceuticals in terms of lifestyle, food supply, and health,” has already been the key logic underpinning the current regime of toxic chemical governance. This framing has resulted in extreme inequities in exposure to chemical risk and in the distribution of their benefits.
Focusing on the need for improved CBA, while welcome, does not address our more substantive claim: that toxic chemical governance failure has resulted from...
Rights
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences.
Locate the Document
DOI
10.1093/biosci/biz129
Persistent Identifier
https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/32354
Citation Details
Grabowski, Z. J., Chiapella, A. M., Alattar, M. A., Denton, A. D., Rozance, M. A., & Granek, E. F. (2019). Trade-Offs by Whom for Whom? A Response to Calow. BioScience, 69(12), 954-955.