IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v27y1988i10p1113-1123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Bhopal disaster and the right to know

Author

Listed:
  • Jasanoff, Sheila

Abstract

The chemical disaster in Bhopal jolted activist groups around the world into renewing their demands for right-to-know legislation granting them broader access to information about hazardous technologies. This article explores the obstacles to creating effective right-to-know policies when technology is transferred across national boundaries. The events leading to the Bhopal accident are first examined in order to assess how far the tragedy can be attributed to gaps in knowledge or to breakdowns in communication. Using Bhopal as a case study, the article then considers three issues that are central to the design of right-to-know policies: who has a right to receive information about hazards; who has the duty to disclose such information, and, where necessary, to produce missing information; what information should be available for disclosure? This inquiry suggests that the circles of those with a right to know and those with a duty to disclose should both be larger than under existing right-to-know laws. More systematic risk information should also be generated, including probabilistic estimates of risk and environmental impact analyses. Finally, the article asks whether such improvements in knowledge and communication would prevent disasters of the kind that occurred in Bhopal. It concludes that for knowledge to be meaningful it must be correlated with the power to act preventively. This implies, in turn, that those with a right to know have to be given an opportunity to participate in technology transfer decisions before it is too late to choose a technology that is well adapted to the technical and cultural circumstances of the importing country.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasanoff, Sheila, 1988. "The Bhopal disaster and the right to know," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 27(10), pages 1113-1123, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:10:p:1113-1123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(88)90306-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elisa Morgera, 2015. "Fair and Equitable Benefit-Sharing at the Cross-Roads of the Human Right to Science and International Biodiversity Law," Laws, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-29, December.
    2. Marcelo Firpo de Souza Porto & Carlos Machado de Freitas, 1996. "Major Chemical Accidents in Industrializing Countries: The Socio‐Political Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 19-29, February.
    3. Deanna Kemp & John R. Owen & Éléonore Lèbre, 2021. "Tailings facility failures in the global mining industry: Will a ‘transparency turn’ drive change?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 122-134, January.
    4. Matthias Beck, 2016. "The Risk Implications of Globalisation: An Exploratory Analysis of 105 Major Industrial Incidents (1971–2010)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Cornelie Crous & John R. Owen & Lochner Marais & Samkelisiwe Khanyile & Deanna Kemp, 2021. "Public disclosure of mine closures by listed South African mining companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 1032-1042, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:10:p:1113-1123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.