https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130630 2026-04-06T07:14:48Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131248 Abordar la desigualdad: el primer paso más allá del COVID-19 y hacia la sostenibilidad Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph P.; Arango-Quiroga, Johan; Metaxas, Kyriakos A.; Showalter, Amy L. La pandemia del COVID-19 ha afectado a miles de millones de vidas en todo el mundo y ha revelado y agravado las desigualdades sociales y económicas que han surgido durante las últimas décadas. A medida que los gobiernos consideran las estrategias económicas y de salud pública para responder a la crisis, es fundamental también abordar las debilidades de sus sistemas económicos y sociales que inhibieron su capacidad para responder de manera integral a la pandemia. Estas mismas debilidades también han socavado los esfuerzos para promover la igualdad y la sostenibilidad. Este documento explora más de 30 intervenciones en las siguientes nueve categorías de cambio que tienen el potencial de abordar la desigualdad, brindan acceso a todos los ciudadanos a bienes y servicios esenciales, y avanzar en el progreso hacia la sostenibilidad: (1) Transferencias de ingresos y riqueza para facilitar un aumento equitativo del poder adquisitivo / ingresos disponibles; (2) ensanchamiento de la propiedad de los trabajadores y ciudadanos de los medios de producción y prestación de servicios, permitiendo a las empresas que la obtención de beneficios se distribuya de forma más equitativa; (3) cambios en el suministro de bienes y servicios esenciales para más ciudadanos; (4) cambios en la demanda de bienes y servicios más sostenibles deseados por la gente; (5) estabilizar y asegurar el empleo y la fuerza laboral; (6) reducir el desproporcionado poder de las corporaciones y los más ricos en el mercado y el sistema político a través de la expansión y la aplicación de la ley antimonopolio de modo que el dominio de unas pocas empresas en sectores críticos ya no prevalezca (7) provisión gubernamental de bienes y servicios esenciales como educación, atención médica, vivienda, alimentación y movilidad; (8) una reasignación del gasto público entre operaciones militares y necesidades sociales domésticas; y (9) suspender o reestructurar la deuda de los países emergentes y en desarrollo países. Cualquier intervención que se centre en hacer crecer la economía también debe ir acompañada de aquellos que compensan los compromisos resultantes para la salud, la seguridad y el medio ambiente del aumento consumo insostenible. Este documento compara e identifica las intervenciones que deben ser consideradas como un primer paso fundamental importante para ir más allá de la pandemia COVID-19 y hacia la sostenibilidad. En este sentido, proporciona un conjunto integral de estrategias que podrían promover avances hacia un componente del Objetivo de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) 10 para reducir la desigualdad dentro de los países. Sin embargo, las intervenciones candidatas también se contrastan con los 17 ODS para revelar posibles áreas problemáticas/compensaciones que pueden necesitar una atención cuidadosa. 2020-07-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131184 Legal Considerations of Reproductive Hazards in Industry in the United States Ashford, Nicholas A. Clearly, the human risks posed by reproductive hazards in the work place are both serious and far-reaching. An effective control strategy, then, must be one that emphasises prevention while preserving employment opportunities for the worker. It is hoped that employers will recognise the need for voluntary abatement of reproductive hazards. It must be recognised, however, that employees may need to avail themselves of legal mechanisms to encourage preventive actions. In many cases the most readily available mechanisms for preventive relief will be those created by federal statute; in other instances, private actions may be required. Legislative and statutory mechanisms include standard-setting for reproductive hazards; access to exposure and medical records; the rights of workers to individually refuse hazardous work; and antidiscrimination protection. Private actions include the court injunction; collective bargaining by unions; and suits for damages suffered. 1984-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131181 Trade-off Analysis (with a revised Rawlsian Decision-making Philosophy) as an Alternative to Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) in Socio-technical Decisions Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Nicholas A.; Söderbaum, Peter This paper discusses the concept of trade-off analysis as an alternative to cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in socio-technical decisions. The concept of trade-off analysis is not new, but increasing dissatisfaction with CBA as the centerpiece of decision analysis and concerns for Rawlsian equity warrant its reintroduction into decision-making. As a decision-support tool, trade-off analysis [1] allows decision-makers to avoid monetizing and aggregating non-monetary factors over time; [2] invites the involvement of stakeholders into policy debates since there is greater transparency as to who benefits and who is harmed by a particular policy; [3] enables analysts to undertake a comparative analysis of alternatives over time; and [4] takes into account the important role of technological change in shaping the state and performance of a system. In addition, a revised Rawlsian approach to incorporating equity and environmental considerations into decision-making is advocated as a way of promoting sustainable development. While the proposed framework has yet to be applied on a wide scale, the authors believe it approximates the way that decisions are actually made in the political system and holds the potential to assist with decision-making for sustainable development in a broad variety of contexts. 2008-02-20T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131180 The Many-Faceted Nature of the Precautionary Principle: Science, Technology, Social Justice, and Accountability Transcript of “The Many-Faceted Nature of the Precautionary Principle: Science, Technology, Social Justice, and Accountability” presented at the “Symposium on Health Risks, Innovation and Precaution”, Paris, 24 June 2015, Available at: https://youtu.be/l0slNw371cc 2015-06-24T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131179 Misinformation and What to Do About It Ashford, Nicholas A. Video presentation on Misinformation and What to Do About It by Prof. Nicholas A. Ashford, MIT on 11 June 2021 DISINFORMATION: The Straight Scoop. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvWbvlWfq98 2021-06-11T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131177 Toxicant‑induced loss of tolerance for chemicals, foods, and drugs: assessing patterns of exposure behind a global phenomenon Masri, Shahir; Miller, Claudia; Palmer, Raymond; Ashford, Nicholas A. Background: Despite 15–36% of the U.S. population reporting Chemical Intolerances (CI) or sensitivity, the condition has been overlooked in medicine and public health. CI is characterized by multisystem symptoms and new-onset intolerances that develop in a subset of individuals following a major chemical exposure event or repeated low-level exposures. While Toxicant-Induced Loss of Tolerance (TILT) is a two-stage disease mechanism proposed to explain CI, less is known about the exposures that initiate the disease, than about the intolerances that have been documented. Methods: We reviewed eight major exposure events that preceded onset of chemical intolerance in groups of individuals sharing the same exposure. Our goal was to identify the chemicals and/or groups of chemicals that were most pervasive during each exposure event as well as identify the concentrations of key chemicals involved in each exposure event and the proportions of exposed individuals who ultimately developed TILT following exposure. Case studies we selected for review included (1) workers at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters during renovations; (2) Gulf War veterans; (3) pesticide exposure among casino workers; (4) exposure to aircraft oil fumes; (5) the World Trade Center tragedy; (6) surgical implants; (7) moldy environments; and (8) tunnel workers exposed to solvents. Results: Mixed volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds (VOCs and SVOCs), followed by pesticides and combustion products were most prevalent across TILT initiation events. As a broader category, synthetic organic chemicals and their combustion products were the primary exposures associated with chemical intolerance. Such chemicals included pesticides, peroxides, nerve agents, anti-nerve agent drugs, lubricants and additives, xylene, benzene, and acetone. Conclusion: A select group of exposures were predominant in several major initiating events, suggesting their potential role in TILT initiation. Such insights are useful to public health scientists, physicians, and policymakers seeking to minimize harmful exposures and prevent future disease. 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131175 The Fight Against Misinformation Isn’t Just on Facebook: Broadcast and Talk Radio Are As Big a Problem As Social Media Ashford, Nicholas A. 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131174 Covid-19 Could Be an Opportunity to Combat Inequality Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Nicholas A. 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131173 Addressing Inequality: The First Step Beyond COVID-19 and towards Sustainability Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph; Arango-Quiroga, Johan; Metaxas, Kyriakos; Showalter, Amy The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted billions of lives across the world and has revealed and worsened the social and economic inequalities that have emerged over the past several decades. As governments consider public health and economic strategies to respond to the crisis, it is critical they also address the weaknesses of their economic and social systems that inhibited their ability to respond comprehensively to the pandemic. These same weaknesses have also undermined efforts to advance equality and sustainability. This paper explores over 30 interventions across the following nine categories of change that hold the potential to address inequality, provide all citizens with access to essential goods and services, and advance progress towards sustainability: (1) Income and wealth transfers to facilitate an equitable increase in purchasing power/disposable income; (2) broadening worker and citizen ownership of the means of production and supply of services, allowing corporate profit-taking to be more equitably distributed; (3) changes in the supply of essential goods and services for more citizens; (4) changes in the demand for more sustainable goods and services desired by people; (5) stabilizing and securing employment and the workforce; (6) reducing the disproportionate power of corporations and the very wealthy on the market and political system through the expansion and enforcement of antitrust law such that the dominance of a few firms in critical sectors no longer prevails; (7) government provision of essential goods and services such as education, healthcare, housing, food, and mobility; (8) a reallocation of government spending between military operations and domestic social needs; and (9) suspending or restructuring debt from emerging and developing countries. Any interventions that focus on growing the economy must also be accompanied by those that offset the resulting compromises to health, safety, and the environment from increasing unsustainable consumption. This paper compares and identifies the interventions that should be considered as an important foundational first step in moving beyond the COVID-19 pandemic and towards sustainability. In this regard, it provides a comprehensive set of strategies that could advance progress towards a component of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10 to reduce inequality within countries. However, the candidate interventions are also contrasted with all 17 SDGs to reveal potential problem areas/tradeoffs that may need careful attention. 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131114 The Many-Faceted Nature of the Precautionary Principle: Science, Technology, Social Justice, and Accountability Ashford, Nicholas A. Nicholas Ashford video on “The Many-Faceted Nature of the Precautionary Principle: Science, Technology, Social Justice, and Accountability” presented at the “Symposium on Health Risks, Innovation and Precaution”, Paris, 24 June 2015, sponsored by ANSES, The French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety.” Available at: https://youtu.be/l0slNw371cc 2015-06-24T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131109 Transformation of the Industrial State During a Perfect Storm Ashford, Nicholas A. Ashford, Nicholas (2016) “Transformation of the Industrial State During a Perfect Storm” Presentation at Delft University (Scroll down to my picture then choose “watch lecture”) http://www.tudelft.nl/en/research/thematic-cooperation/delft-research-based-initiatives/delft-energy-initiative/meet-the-energy-leaders/ Also available at: https://collegerama.tudelft.nl/Mediasite/Play/b07070661ea24ebca6c4d2f42a34a6fd1d 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131107 Creating Ethical Engineers Ashford, Nicholas A. 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131106 Universal Basic Income and Inclusive Capitalism: Consequences for Sustainability Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Nicholas A.; Ashford, Robert; Arango-Quiroga, Johan Over the past forty years, income growth for the middle and lower classes has stagnated, while the economy (and with it, economic inequality) has grown significantly. Early automation, the decline of labor unions, changes in corporate taxation, the financialization and globalization of the economy, deindustrialization in the U.S. and many OECD countries, and trade have contributed to these trends. However, the transformative roles of more recent automation and digital technologies/artificial intelligence (AI) are now considered by many as additional and potentially more potent forces undermining the ability of workers to maintain their foothold in the economy. These drivers of change are intensifying the extent to which advancing technology imbedded in increasingly productive real capital is driving productivity. To compound the problem, many solutions presented by industrialized nations to environmental problems rely on hyper-e cient technologies, which if fully implemented, could further advance the displacement of well-paid job opportunities for many. While there are numerous ways to address economic inequality, there is growing interest in using some form of universal basic income (UBI) to enhance income and provide economic stability. However, these approaches rarely consider the potential environmental impact from the likely increase in aggregate demand for goods and services or consider ways to focus this demand on more sustainable forms of consumption. Based on the premise that the problems of income distribution and environmental sustainability must be addressed in an integrated and holistic way, this paper considers how a range of approaches to financing a UBI system, and a complementary market solution based on an ownership-broadening approach to inclusive capitalism, might advance or undermine strategies to improve environmental sustainability. 2019-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131105 Achieving Environmental and Global Climate Goals by Governmental Regulatory Targeting Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph Strategic niche management and transition management have been promoted as useful avenues to pursue in order to achieve both specific product or process changes and system transformation by focusing on technology development through evolutionary and co-evolutionary processes, guided by government and relevant stakeholders. However, these processes are acknowledged to require decades to achieve their intended changes, a timeframe that is too long to adequately address many of the environmental and social issues many industrialized and industrializing nations are facing. An approach that involves incumbents and does not consider targets that look beyond reasonably foreseeable technology is likely to advance a model where incumbents evolve rather than being replaced or displaced. On the other hand, approaches that focus on creating new entrants could nurture niche development or deployment of disruptive technologies, but those technologies may only be marginally better than the technologies they replace. Either approach may take a long time to achieve their goals. Sustainable development requires both radical disruptive technological and institutional changes, the latter including stringent regulation, the integration of disparate goals, and changes in incentives to enable new voices to contribute to new systems and solutions. This paper outlines options for a strong governmental role in setting future sustainability goals and the pathways for achieving them. 2018-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131104 Arkema was not a Natural Disaster. It was a Preventable Accident Waiting to Happen Ashford, Nicholas A. 2017-09-06T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131103 The New TSCA: Challenges Remain Ashford, Nicholas A. 2017-05-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131102 De-[Constructing] Growth: Decoupling Profits from Unsustainable Production Ashford, Nicholas A. 2017-01-12T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131100 Evolving Algorithms for Sustainable Development: Technology, Policy, and Environment Ashford, Nicholas A. Ashford, Nicholas (2016). “Evolving Algorithms for Sustainable Development: Technology, Policy, and Environment” Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ayyib5THzxw&feature=youtu.be 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131095 Aligning Policies for Low-carbon System Innovation in Europe Ashford, Nicholas A.; Renda, Andrea 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131093 The Flaws in the Emerging Toxics Reform Legislation and How They Can Be Fixed Ashford, Nicholas A. 2016-04-12T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131092 Making Serious Inroads into Achieving Sustainable Development: Is Strategic Niche Management/Transition Management Sufficient to Transform the Industrial State? Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph Making Serious Inroads into Achieving Sustainable Development: Is Strategic Niche Management/Transition Management Sufficient to Transform the Industrial State?” Conference: 6th International Sustainability Transitions (IST) Conference. Sustainability Transitions and Wider Transformative Change Historical Roots and Future Pathways, At Brighton, University of Sussex Campus (Falmer), UK August 2015. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280839263_Making_Serious_Inroads_into_Achieving_Sustainable_Development_Is_Strategic_Niche_ManagementTransition_Management_Sufficient_to_Transform_the_Industrial_State 2015-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131091 Cancer Risk: Role of Environment Ashford, Nicholas A.; Bauman, Patricia; Brown, Halina; Clapp, Richard; Finkel, Adam; Gee, David; Hattis, Dale; Martuzzi, Marco; Sasco, Annie; Sass, Jennifer IN THEIR REPORT “Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions” (2 January, p. 78), C. Tomasetti and B. Vogelstein discuss an interesting correlation (0.804) between estimated lifetime stem cell division number in 31 tissue types and corresponding cancer incidence rates in the United States. However, their assertion that only 35% of cancer risk variation is due to environmental or genetic factors is problematic. Letter to the Editor 2015-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131090 Trade Policy Ashford, Nicholas A. In an otherwise insightful and thoughtful article, Sebastian Pfotenhauer (Trade Policy Is Science Policy,” Issues, Fall 2013) might better have entitled his contribution “Trade Policy Needs to Be Reconciled with Science Policy.” The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the agreements administered by the World Trade Organization, particularly the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), were adopted to promote international trade and increase the economic benefits therefrom. Harmonization of environmental, health, and safety, and (EHS) standards and practices was generally not the goal of these agreements, except perhaps for the TBT agreement, which was predicated on EHS standards being based on “strong science” that could result in uniformity dictated by rigorous scientific consensus focused on risk assessments. Letter to the Editor 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131088 A Four-day Workweek: a Policy for Improving Employment and Environmental Conditions in Europe Ashford, Nicholas A.; Kallis, Giorgos 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131086 Friday off’: Reducing Working hours in Europe Kallis, Giorgos; Kalush, Michael; O'Flynn, Jack; Rossiter, Jack; Ashford, Nicholas A. This article explores the pros and cons for reducing working hours in Europe. To arrive to an informed judgment we review critically the theoretical and empirical literature, mostly from economics, concerning the relation between working hours on the one hand, and productivity, employment, quality of life, and the environment, on the other. We adopt a binary economics distinction between capital and labor productiveness, and are concerned with how working hours may be reduced without harming the earning capacity of workers. There are reasons to believe that reducing working hours may absorb some unemployment, especially in the short-run, even if less than what is advocated by proponents of the proposal. Further, there may well be strong benefits for the quality of peoples’ lives. Environmental benefits are likely but depend crucially on complementary policies or social conditions that will ensure that the time liberated will not be directed to resource-intensive or environmentally harmful consumption. It is questionable whether reduced working hours are sustainable in the long-term given resource limits and climate change. We conclude that while the results of reducing working hours are uncertain, this may be a risk worth taking, especially as an interim measure that may relieve unemployment while other necessary structural changes are instituted. 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131084 Addressing the Crisis in Employment and Consumer Demand: Reconciliation with Financial and Environmental Sustainability Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Robert 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131082 Broadening Capital Acquisition with the Earnings of Capital as a Means of Sustainable Growth and Environmental Sustainability Ashford, Robert; Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Nicholas A. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131051 The Crisis in Employment and Consumer Demand: Reconciliation with Environmental Sustainability Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph; Ashford, Robert This paper argues that a sustainable industrial system depends not only on good environmental and public health outcomes, but also on sustainable employment and earning capacity in a sustainable economic system. These concerns are likely to dominate future national political debates, requiring responses that increase the earning capacity of individuals through changes in the nature of work and employment, and in the ownership of productive capital. Making the economy greener, while certainly necessary for long-term economic and societal survival, does not necessarily mean more and better paying jobs on a large enough scale to make serious progress to reducing unemployment and underemployment. At present, national and global reforms are focused on improving the financial system, which is not synonymous with reforming the economic system or improving the economic status of individual citizens. This paper discusses specific policies and initiatives that need to be considered to ensure sustainable employment and livelihoods. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131049 Major Challenges To Education for Sustainable Development: Can the Current Nature of Institutions of Higher Education Hope to Educate the Change Agents Needed for Sustainable Development? Ashford, Nicholas A. Scholars and professionals committed to fostering sustainable development have urged a re-examination of the curriculum and the restructuring of research in engineering-focused institutions of higher learning. The focus is on engineering, more than on the natural and physical sciences or on social science, because the activities that drive the industrial state – the activities that implement scientific advance – are generally rooted in engineering. Moreover, engineers are known as ‘problem solvers’ and if economies are becoming unsustainable because of engineering, it is natural to ask whether engineering as an activity and as a profession can be re-directed toward achieving sustainable transformations. Of course, engineering can not do it alone; scientific as well as social and legal changes must occur as well. This paper addresses the challenges ahead, if this optimistic vision is to be more than wishful thinking. Following a treatment of the philosophical and intellectual foundations of technological, organizational, social, and pedagogical innovation necessary for sustainable transformations of existing institutions and mindsets, this paper ends by addressing the following themes and questions: (1) How can multi- and trans-disciplinary research and teaching coexist in a meaningful way in today’s university structures? (2) Does education relevant to sustainable development require its own protected incubating environment to survive, or will it otherwise be gobbled up and marginalized by attempting to instill it throughout the traditional curriculum and traditional disciplines? (3) How can difficulties in linking the needed teaching and research be overcome? (4) Even if there exist technical options to do so, how can it be made safe for courageous students to take educational paths different from traditional tracks? (5) What can we learn from comparative analysis of universities in different nations and environments? and (6) What roles can national and EU governments have in accelerating the needed changes? 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131047 The Importance of Regulation-Induced Innovation for Sustainable Development Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph This article explores the complex relationship between environmental regulation, innovation, and sustainable development within the context of an increasingly globalizing economy. The economic development, environment, and employment aspects of sustainable development are emphasized. We contend that the most crucial problem in achieving sustainability is lock-in or path dependency due to (1) the failure to envision, design, and implement policies that achieve co-optimization, or the mutually reinforcing, of social goals, and (2) entrenched economic and political interests that gain from the present system and advancement of its current trends. The article argues that industrial policy, environmental law and policy, and trade initiatives must be ‗opened up‘ by expanding the practice of multi-purpose policy design, and that these policies must be integrated as well. Sustainable development requires stimulating revolutionary technological innovation through environmental, health, safety, economic, and labor market regulation. Greater support for these changes must also be reinforced by ‗opening up the participatory and political space‘ to enable new voices to contribute to integrated thinking and solutions. 2011-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131044 Rethinking the Role of Information in Chemicals Policy: Implications for TSCA and REACH Koch, Lars; Ashford, Nicholas A. 2006-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131043 Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Incorporating Science, Technology, Fairness, and Accountability in Environmental, Health, and Safety Decisions Ashford, Nicholas A. 2005-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131041 Scientific, ethical and legal challenges in work-related genetic testing in the United States Ashford, Nicholas A. Human monitoring in the workplace, sometimes referred to as medical screening, is a collation of practices that focuses on the workers as an indicator that: 1) disease may result on exposure to a toxic substance, radiation, or other traumas (medical surveillance); 2) a toxic substance has been absorbed into the body (biological monitoring); 3) a particular worker may be especially predisposed to disease (genetic screening or other probes of sensitivity); and 4) a pre-clinical disease state exists, indicating that potentially harmful exposure has occurred (genetic monitoring). These monitoring practices, especially when required or carried out by a government agency or the employer, raise serious and complex scientific, legal, and ethical concerns. This article focuses on the practice of “genetic testing” that involves mainly types 3 and 4, i.e., those involving both genetic screening for predisposition to disease, and genetic monitoring for indications of potential harm due to workplace exposure. However, the other two types of monitoring may also be relevant. The article also constructs a philosophic framework for: 1) examining the adequacy of law as an embodiment of ethical values, and sound science, concerning the genetic testing of workers; and 2) identifying possible solutions to the attendant legal and moral dilemmas. In the workplace, the analysis necessarily focuses on three sets of activities involving distinct participants: workers, employers, corporations, physicians – either in-house or under contract – and the government. The sets of activities deserving separate consideration are: 1) requiring the worker to submit to monitoring tests; 2) disseminating the results of the tests; and 3) using the test results. Because the different kinds of monitoring address different stages of the pathway from exposure to disease, and because what is monitored affects different groups of workers differently, specification of exemplar problems and a case-by-case analysis are essential, lest we face useless generalities at the end. 2005-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131039 THE CRISIS IN U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL CANCER POLICY Epstein, Samuel S.; Ashford, Nicholas A.; Blackwelder, Brent; Castleman, Barry; Cohen, Gary; Goldsmith, Edward; Mazzocchi, Anthony; Young, Quentin The incidence of cancer in the United States and other major industrialized nations has escalated to epidemic proportions over recent decades, and greater increases are expected. While smoking is the single largest cause of cancer, the incidence of childhood cancers and a wide range of predominantly nonsmoking- related cancers in men and women has increased greatly. This modern epidemic does not reflect lack of resources of the U.S. cancer establishment, the National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society; the NCI budget has increased 20-fold since passage of the 1971 National Cancer Act, while funding for research and public information on primary prevention remains minimal. The cancer establishment bears major responsibility for the cancer epidemic, due to its overwhelming fixation on damage control—screening, diagnosis, treatment, and related molecular research— and indifference to preventing a wide range of avoidable causes of cancer, other than faulty lifestyle, particularly smoking. This mindset is based on a discredited 1981 report by a prominent pro-industry epidemiologist, guesstimating that environmental and occupational exposures were responsible for only 5 percent of cancer mortality, even though a prior chemical industry report admitted that 20 percent was occupational in origin. This report still dominates public policy, despite overwhelming contrary scientific evidence on avoidable causes of cancer from involuntary exposures to a wide range of environmental carcinogens. Since 1998, the ACS has been planning to gain control of national cancer policy, now under federal authority. These plans, developed behind closed doors and under conditions of nontransparency, with recent well-intentioned but mistaken bipartisan Congressional support, pose a major and poorly reversible threat to cancer prevention and to winning the losing war against cancer. 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131037 Law and Science Policy in Federal Regulation of Formaldehyde Ashford, Nicholas A.; Ryan, William C.; Caldart, Charles C. 1983-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131035 Inherently Safer Production, A Natural Complement to Cleaner Production Zwetsloot, Gerard; Ashford, Nicholas A. 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131034 Pathways to Sustainable Industrial Transformations: Cooptimizing Competitiveness, Employment, and Environment Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hafkamp, Wim; Frits, Prakke; Vergragt, Philip 2001-06-30T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131032 Implementing A Precautionary Approach In Decisions Affecting Health, Safety, And The Environment: Risk, Technology Alternatives, And Tradeoff Analysis Ashford, Nicholas A. 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131030 Government And Innovation in Europe And North America Ashford, Nicholas A. This article challenges certain tenets of the theories of reflexive law and ecological modernization. While far-sighted prevention-oriented and structural changes are needed, some proponents of these theories argue that the very industries and firms that create environmental problems can, through continuous institutional learning; the application of life cycle analysis; dialogue and networks with stakeholders; and implementation of "environmental management systems," be transformed into sustainable industries and firms. While useful, these reforms are insufficient. It is not marginal or incremental changes that are needed for sustainability, but rather major product, process, and system transformations – often beyond the capacity of the dominant industries and firms. This article also questions the alleged failure of regulation to stimulate needed technological changes, and identifies the conditions under which innovation for sustainability can occur. Finally, it discusses differences in needed policies for industrialized and developing countries. 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130924 Negotiated environmental and occupational health and safety agreements in the United States: lessons for policy Ashford, Nicholas A.; Caldart, Charles C. The interest in so-called voluntary approaches to supplement or replace formal environmental, or occupational health and safety regulation has taken on new importance in both Europe and the United States. These approaches fall into two sharp divisions: (1) industry-initiated codes of good practice focusing on environmental management systems or performance goals, and (2) negotiated agreements between government and individual firms or industry sector trade associations focusing on regulation or compliance. This paper addresses the latter. In the United States, the motivations behind negotiated agreements are manifold and sometimes contradictory including desires (1) to facilitate the achievement of legislated or mandatory environmental goals by introducing flexibility and cost-effective compliance measures, (2) to negotiate levels of compliance (standards) fulfilling legislative mandates, (3) to negotiate legal definitions of Best Available Technology and other technology-based requirements, and (4) to weaken environmental initiatives. Efforts in furtherance of negotiated agreements have thus been greeted with mixed results by the various stakeholders. In the context of an anti-regulatory climate in the United States, the Administrative Procedures Act has been amended to allow “negotiated rulemaking” in achieving regulatory agency mandates. However, even before this legal innovation, regulatory agencies have been negotiating regulations. Independent of this legal avenue, negotiated compliance with industry associations is being fostered through the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) “Commonsense Initiative” and with individual firms through “EPA's Project XL”, again with mixed reception. The proposed paper describes and analyses negotiated agreements in the United States in the context of (1) EPA efforts to ensure environmental protection and (2) the Occupational Safety and Health Administration efforts to ensure worker health and safety. These agreements can be described according to the following taxonomy: (a) Negotiated regulation (either preceding formal regulation or as a substitute for formal regulation); (b) Negotiated compliance (implementing regulation or informal agreements) (i) the means and timetable for coming into compliance with emission, effluent, or concentration requirements (ii) negotiation in the context of an enforcement action in which the firm is out of legal compliance (for example, encouraging cleaner production through the leveraging of penalty reductions). The criteria for evaluation include: environmental or health and safety outcomes, effects on stimulating technological change, time for development (time to completion)/implementation (likelihood of court challenge), stakeholder influence (ability of large firms to dominate outcome, environmentalists–industry, or labour–management balance of power),and administrative features. 2001-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130922 Porter Debate Stuck in 1970's Ashford, Nicholas A. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130920 Compliance costs: the neglected issue of technological innovation Ashford, Nicholas A. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130919 Encouraging Inherently Safer Production in European Firms: A Report from the Field Ashford, Nicholas A.; Zwetsloot, Gerard It is now generally recognized that in order to make significant advances in accident prevention, the focus of industrial firms must shift from assessing the risks of existing production and manufacturing systems to discovering technological alternatives, i.e. from the identification of problems to the identification of solutions. Encouraging the industrial firm to perform (1) an inherent safety opportunity audit (ISOA) to identify where inherently safer technology is needed, and (2) a technology options analysis (TOA) and to identify specific inherently safer options will advance the adoption of primary prevention strategies that will alter production systems so that there are less inherent safety risks. Experience gained from a methodology to encourage inherently safer production in industrial firms in the Netherlands and Greece is discussed. Successful approaches require both technological and managerial changes. Firms must have the willingness, opportunity, and the capability to change. Implications for the EU Seveso, IPPC, and EMAS Directives are also discussed. 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130917 Low-level chemical sensitivity: implications for research and social policy Ashford, Nicholas A. There is increasing evidence that human exposure to levels of chemicals once thought to be safe--or presenting insignificant risk--are, in fact, harmful. So-called low-level exposures are now known to be associated with adverse biological effects including cancer, endocrine disruption, and chemical sensitivity. This requires that we change both (1) the way we design research linking chemicals and health, and (2) the solutions we devise to address chemically caused injury. The new and emerging science of low-level exposure to chemicals requires appropriate social policy responses which include regulation of toxic substances, notification of those exposed, and compensation and reasonable accommodation to those affected. Research and social policy need to be focused towards two distinct groups: (1) those individuals who could become chemically intolerant as a result of an initiating exposure, and (2) those individuals who have already become chemically intolerant and are now sensitive to chemicals at low levels. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130915 Social and Policy Implications of Low-Level Exposures to Chemicals Ashford, Nicholas A.; Miller, Claudia S. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130914 The Economic and Social Context of Special Populations Ashford, Nicholas A. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130912 Negotiations as a means of developing and implementing environmental and occupational health and safety policy Caldart, Charles; Ashford, Nicholas A. 1999-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130910 Low-Level Exposures to Chemicals Challenge Both Science and Regulatory Policy Ashford, Nicholas A.; Miller, Claudia S. 1998-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130892 Policies for the Promotion of Inherent Safety Ashford, Nicholas A. 1997-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130891 Industrial safety: the neglected issue in industrial ecology Ashford, Nicholas A. 1997-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130890 Low-level Chemical Sensitivity: Current Perspectives Ashford, Nicholas A.; Miller, Claudia S. 1996-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130887 Monitoring the Worker and the Community for Chemical Exposure and Disease: Legal and Ethical Considerations in the United States Ashford, Nicholas A. Biomonitoring of workers and communities raises important legal and ethical concerns, but the two contexts are different. Monitoring workers is usually done by, or at the instigation of, the employer who in law is responsible for their health and safety. Whenever worker monitoring leads to the removal of workers, difficult issues emerge affecting labor-management relations, labor law and discrimination law. Resulting legal and ethical questions are usually framed within the context of the employment contract or labor relationship. In contrast, public health or environmental officials may be the driving force behind biomonitoring of the community. No employer-employee relationship exists, and the doctor-patient relationship may be tenuous. The community may often initiate the request for biomonitoring, but the situation is no less contentious. On the basis of an historical view of monitoring events within the U.S. context, mechanisms are suggested that would promote positive interactions between employers and workers, and between individuals and groups in the monitoring of chemically contaminated communities. These suggestions should have relevance to experience in other countries. 1996-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130886 Chemical Sensitivity: Perspectives from North America and Europe Miller, Claudia S.; Ashford, Nicholas A. Proceedings of the Conference on Healthy Buildings 1995: An International Conference on Healthy Buildings in Mild Climates. Milan, September 11-14. 1995-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130885 Exploiting Opportunities for Pollution Prevention in EPA Enforcement Agreements Becker, Monica; Ashford, Nicholas A. 1995-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130882 Government Strategies and Policies for Cleaner Production Ashford, Nicholas A.; Clarke, Robin; Aloisi de Larderel, Jacqueline; Oldenburg, Kirsten; de Hoo, Sybren; Kryger, John 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130880 Monitoring the Worker and the Community Exposure and Disease: Legal and Ethical Considerations in the United States Ashford, Nicholas A. 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130878 Chemical Sensitivity: An Emerging Public Health and Environmental Problem Ashford, Nicholas A.; Miller, Claudia S. 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130876 The Encouragement of Technological Change for Preventing Chemical Accidents: Moving Firms from Secondary Prevention and Mitigation to Primary Prevention Ashford, Nicholas A.; Gobbell, James V.; Lachman, Judith; Matthiesen, Mary; Minzner, Ann; Stone, Robert 1993-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130875 Science and Values in the Regulatory Process Ashford, Nicholas A. 1988-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130874 Regulation and Technological Options: The Case of Occupational Exposure to Formaldehyde Rest, Kathleen; Ashford, Nicholas A. 1988-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130872 Changes and Opportunities in the Environment for Technology Bargaining Ashford, Nicholas A.; Ayers, Christine 1987-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130871 Using Regulation to change the Market for Innovation Ashford, Nicholas A.; Ayers, Christine; Stone, Robert 1985-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130652 A Hard Look at Federal Regulation of Formaldehyde: A Departure from Reasoned Decision-Making Ashford, Nicholas A.; William, Ryan; Caldart, Charles C. 1983-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130650 A Framework for Examining the Effects of Industrial Funding on Academic Freedom and the Integrity of the University Ashford, Nicholas A. 1983-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130649 Alternatives to Cost-Benefit Analysis in Regulatory Decisions Ashford, Nicholas A. 1981-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130647 Government Influence on the Process of Innovation in Europe and Japan Allen, Thomas; Utterback, James; Sirbu, Marvin; Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hollomon, Herbert 1978-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130646 Unsafe Working Conditions: Employee Rights Under LMRA and OSHA Ashford, Nicholas A.; Katz, Judith I. 1977-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130643 The Control of Reproductive Hazards in the Workplace: A Prescription for Prevention Ashford, Nicholas A. 1983-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130641 Environmental Protection Laws Ashford, Nicholas A.; Caldart, Charles C. 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130640 Reducing Physical Hazards: Encouraging Inherently Safer Production Ashford, Nicholas A. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130638 Reflections on Environmental Liability Schemes in the United States and the European Union: Limitations and Prospects for Improvement Ashford, Nicholas A. 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130636 The Legacy of the Precautionary Principle in U.S. Law: The Rise of Cost-Benefit Analysis and Risk Assessment as Undermining Factors in Health, Safety, and Environmental Protections Ashford, Nicholas A. 2007-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130634 Multiple Chemical Intolerance and Indoor Air Quality Miller, Claudia S.; Ashford, Nicholas A. 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130633 De-[Constructing] Growth Ashford, Nicholas A. 2016-11-05T00:00:00Z