4.7 Article

Mandatory disclosure of plant emissions into the environment and worker chemical exposure inside plants

Journal

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
Volume 87, Issue -, Pages 124-136

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.017

Keywords

Right-to-know programs; Information-based regulation; Pollution disclosure programs; Occupational exposure; Exposure limits; Worker health

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [SES 1127223]
  2. University of Pittsburgh's Central Research Development Fund
  3. University Center for Social and Urban Research
  4. Center for Industry Studies
  5. University Center for International Studies
  6. European Union Center of Excellence
  7. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  8. Divn Of Social and Economic Sciences [1127223] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our study is the first to test if mandatory pollution disclosure programs, exemplified by the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program, reduce worker chemical exposure. We examine newly available measurements of personal exposure to air contaminants at 1333 plants in the US chemical manufacturing sector between 1984 and 2009. The maximum ratio of exposure to the legal limits per inspection declined substantially, by 11%, in the post-program period. This result provides the first evidence of a reduction in measured risks coinciding with the inception of the TRI program. We find suggestive, not conclusive, evidence to attribute this reduction in part to the TRI program. Our preferred specifications find that plants that are more responsive to the TRI program, as indicated by larger industry-level TRI emission reduction, had 6.5% to 8% lower exposure. However, not all models find statistically significant larger exposure reductions in plants that are more responsive to the TRI program. (c) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available