Contested Governmentalities: NGO enrollment and influence over chemical risk governance rationales and practices Journal Articles uri icon

  •  
  • Overview
  •  
  • Research
  •  
  • Identity
  •  
  • Additional Document Info
  •  
  • View All
  •  

abstract

  • AbstractThe assessment and management of chemical risks is a contested domain of governance. Governments are increasingly investing in multi‐stakeholder processes to address thousands of substances that are in widespread use globally, despite never having been assessed for toxicity and exposure risks to human health and the environment. Using a governmentality approach, we examine whether the increased engagement of NGOs is changing how chemical governance is being conducted in Canada. To do this, we focus on a combination of expert subjectivities, knowledge inputs and prevailing risk assessment and management practices and rationales. The advocacy of alternative conduct and approaches by NGOs (e.g. stronger regulations, reductions in production, shifted burden of proof, new knowledge practices, greater transparency of technical details etc.) is situated within relations of power between neo‐liberal states, industry and science. Various ‘enrollment’ tactics shape the influence of NGOs, which explains in part why particular practices gain ascendency over alternatives (e.g. restrictive timelines, contracts with limited funds, information access, questioning of scientific credibility etc.). The influence of NGOs is complex, as they engage within imposed rules for conduct and governance, simultaneously challenging and reinforcing dominant practices and norms. Risk governmentalities and rationales therefore shape not only the conduct of citizens, but also that of governance stakeholders themselves. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

publication date

  • May 2015