Abstract
Major regulatory initiatives in health and safety are increasingly viewed as too costly, not objectively justified, and thus failing in their mandate to ensure a fair social distribution of rights and burdens. Official but arbitrary assumptions in cancer risk assessment and open-ended statutory language encourage regulatory agencies to overregulate. Also, institutional self-serving motivations of regulatory agencies add incentives to expand regulation. Mitigation of the current regulatory crisis may come from curbing these selfish incentives, and from requiring that regulation be justified on the basis of strict scientific standards of evidence, rather than on arbitrary assumptions and conjectures.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
