IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v6y2016i3d10.1007_s13412-016-0387-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges and opportunities in stimulating public awareness and engagement on US chemicals policy

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline E. Scruggs

    (University of New Mexico)

  • Rachel B. B. Moore

    (University of New Mexico)

Abstract

Consensus is growing among scientists and public health experts that unregulated, potentially hazardous chemicals threaten human and ecosystem viability. The USA is the second largest producer of industrial chemicals, yet very few of these chemicals have been tested for safety due to ineffective regulations. Empirical evidence suggests the American public is largely unaware of the health and environmental challenges posed by toxic substances, and many people are ignorant about chemicals policy and chemical use in consumer products. Chemicals policy reform is under negotiation in the US Congress for the first time in almost 40 years, and the public must be educated about the significance and impact of the various potential policy outcomes as well as how it can engage in reform efforts. Formulating and implementing effective public outreach and engagement methods will require integration of numerous scientific and professional disciplines and communication across traditional disciplinary boundaries. This paper intends to initiate a dialogue in an interdisciplinary venue about why potentially hazardous chemicals do not appear to be a significant concern to the general public and how advocates, academics, scientists, and the media can better work together to improve public education and engagement on chemicals in consumer products and chemicals policy reform. Using interview and focus group findings, evidence of limited science literacy among the American public, and an analysis of media coverage, we begin to address these issues. We invite others to build on this initial work by adding their insights, data, and knowledge to help promote public awareness and engagement on exposures to hazardous chemicals in everyday life and the need for reform of our current system of chemicals management.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline E. Scruggs & Rachel B. B. Moore, 2016. "Challenges and opportunities in stimulating public awareness and engagement on US chemicals policy," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(3), pages 569-579, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:6:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s13412-016-0387-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-016-0387-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13412-016-0387-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-016-0387-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caroline Scruggs & Leonard Ortolano & Megan Schwarzman & Michael Wilson, 2014. "The role of chemical policy in improving supply chain knowledge and product safety," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 132-141, June.
    2. Michael F. Maniates, 2001. "Individualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 1(3), pages 31-52, August.
    3. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mark W. Neff & Zander Albertson, 2020. "Does higher education prepare students to bridge divides in today’s democracy?," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(2), pages 196-204, June.
    2. Stuart Bryce Capstick, 2013. "Public Understanding of Climate Change as a Social Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Lu, Xi & Mo, Hongming & Deng, Yong, 2015. "An evidential opinion dynamics model based on heterogeneous social influential power," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 98-107.
    4. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers, 2013. "Should We Trust in Values? Explaining Public Support for Pro-Environmental Taxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Sedona Chinn & P. Sol Hart, 2021. "Effects of consensus messages and political ideology on climate change attitudes: inconsistent findings and the effect of a pretest," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Michael D. Jones, 2014. "Cultural Characters and Climate Change: How Heroes Shape Our Perception of Climate Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-39, March.
    7. Bazzi, Samuel & Fiszbein, Martin & Gebresilasse, Mesay, 2021. "“Rugged individualism” and collective (in)action during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    8. Daniela Salite, 2019. "Explaining the uncertainty: understanding small-scale farmers’ cultural beliefs and reasoning of drought causes in Gaza Province, Southern Mozambique," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(3), pages 427-441, September.
    9. Janice Y. Jung & Barbara A. Mellers, 2016. "American attitudes toward nudges," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 62-74, January.
    10. Kauder, Björn & Potrafke, Niklas & Ursprung, Heinrich, 2018. "Behavioral determinants of proclaimed support for environment protection policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-41.
    11. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    12. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    13. Veronika Winter & Johanna Kranz & Andrea Möller, 2022. "Climate Change Education Challenges from Two Different Perspectives of Change Agents: Perceptions of School Students and Pre-Service Teachers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-29, May.
    14. Janina Grabs & Graeme Auld & Benjamin Cashore, 2021. "Private regulation, public policy, and the perils of adverse ontological selection," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1183-1208, October.
    15. D'Amato, Alessio & Giaccherini, Matilde & Zoli, Mariangela, 2019. "The Role of Information Sources and Providers in Shaping Green Behaviors. Evidence from Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Elizabeth Suhay & James N. Druckman, 2015. "The Politics of Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 6-15, March.
    17. Philip E. Tetlock & Gregory Mitchell & L. Jason Anastasopoulos, 2013. "Detecting and Punishing Unconscious Bias," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 83-110.
    18. Paul R. Hindsley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2022. "The Role of Cultural Worldviews in Willingness to Pay for Environmental Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(2), pages 243-269, February.
    19. Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias & Christopher R. Jones, 2019. "Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    20. Michael J. Weir & Thomas W. Sproul, 2019. "Identifying Drivers of Genetically Modified Seafood Demand: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.

    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:spr:jenvss:v:6:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s13412-016-0387-4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.